Thank you so much for posting this video. It is hard to understand Leibniz's ideas for only reading through the book or papers. You give a lot of great explanations of his arguments. Thank you again!
First book I ever bought! I was 13. I didn't even know, technically, what metaphysics was, but I felt it was the correct path to go down. This was the year after I received Revelation, or, mystical union with the one, when I rose my hand in church and accepted Christ into my life (after a week of preparing, bc I was absolutely terrified to do so the week previous, my hand was frozen in place). An infinite number of words or pictures could never approach what I experienced. I am reminded of a passage from A Course in Miracles, "Do not let theology delay you, for what you seek is a direct experience." Anyway, that was my first book. Altho at age 10 I wrote a paper on metaphysics and light, darkness and infinity. I was kind of a bad kid lol.
If you imagine Leibniz trying to be a diplomat amongst all systems of thought religion and science, it all starts to make sense. He was actually hired as a diplomat. Even the idea of a monad is a compromise between matter and spirit, between God and independent beings, between science and religion. Between the infinite and the finite. But more than just a compromise, An innovation. He was trying to establish the idea that The Universe is comprised of perception, or a points of subjectivity. This foresees, in my opinion, the relation between the quantum realm and consciousness. And makes me think of Hegel saying all rests on the statement that “Substance Is subject.” Also there is a contradictory point in the Monadology. Although the monads or souls are discrete and not influenced by others, there is a refractory quality by which the many are reflected into larger ones and ultimately to “THE ONE.” Like translucent bubbles, Holographic film, fractal geometry that grows infinitely large and infinitely small, the ancient axiom “as above so below. “ The macrocosm and microcosm. This begins to sound a lot like astrology. And someone well-versed in astrology Will have a different take on The Monadology. Leibniz was a big fan of a book called The Astronomicon. In fact, I believe that just as Isaac newton what is a closet alchemist, Leibniz, a devout Lutheran, was a closet astrologer. His system was trying to reconcile Christianity and the Christian God with the formidable ancient inheritance of astrology, which comprise much of the science of the day 1600’s.
Outstanding video! If we imagine Leibniz trying to be a diplomat amongst all systems of thought, religion and science, it all starts to make sense. He was actually hired as a diplomat. Even the idea of a monad is a compromise between matter and spirit, between God and independent beings, between science and religion. Between the infinite and the finite. But more than just a compromise, An innovation. He was trying to establish the idea that The Universe is comprised of perception, or a points of subjectivity. This foresees, in my opinion, the relation between the quantum realm and consciousness. And makes me think of Hegel saying all rests on the statement that “Substance Is subject.” Also there is a contradictory point in the Monadology. (Another important compromise!) Although the monads or souls are discrete and not influenced by others, there is a refractory quality by which the many are reflected into larger ones and ultimately to “THE ONE.” Like translucent bubbles, Holographic film, fractal geometry that grows infinitely large and infinitely small, the ancient axiom “as above so below. “ The macrocosm and microcosm. This begins to sound a lot like astrology. And someone well-versed in astrology Will have a different take on The Monadology. Leibniz was a big fan of a book called The Astronomicon. In fact, I believe that just as Isaac newton what is a closet alchemist, Leibniz, a devout Lutheran, was a closet astrologer. His system was trying to reconcile Christianity and the Christian God with the formidable ancient inheritance of astrology, which comprise much of the science of the day 1600’s. The notion of predicate that you describe also smacks of The science of astrology.
11:45 I think the English text creates confusion. I haven't read the original German (it might've been Latin just as well), but clearly he means the German Vollendung, not so much Perfection as Completeness, Finality (full ending).
So Leibniz disagrees with Spinoza? For Spinoza, we have substance, attributes, and modes. Attributes are either extension or thought. So, do I understand you correctly, no extension under Leibniz, but yes for Spinoza?
Is each Monad its own species? Since each have a quality of thisness or uniquesness. For example, I, Kevin Murphy, am not part of the human species, but I am an individual species, because I am a composite of individual and unique monads? if so, that is a fascinating concept, and really applies to me, and it explains why I perceive individual unique substances. I always struggled with abstract generalization. I only use it for practical reasons and aesthetic reasons, and because it is more than likely coded in my faculty of language, in order to help my understanding.
Here’s my post. If you imagine Leibniz trying to be a diplomat amongst all systems of thought religion and science, it all starts to make sense. He was actually hired as a diplomat. Even the idea of a monad is a compromise between matter and spirit, between God and independent beings, between science and religion. Between the infinite and the finite. But more than just a compromise, An innovation. He was trying to establish the idea that The Universe is comprised of perception, or a points of subjectivity. This foresees, in my opinion, the relation between the quantum realm and consciousness. And makes me think of Hegel saying all rests on the statement that “Substance Is subject.” Also there is a contradictory point in the Monadology. Although the monads or souls are discrete and not influenced by others, there is a refractory quality by which the many are reflected into larger ones and ultimately to “THE ONE.” Like translucent bubbles, Holographic film, fractal geometry that grows infinitely large and infinitely small, the ancient axiom “as above so below. “ The macrocosm and microcosm. This begins to sound a lot like astrology. And someone well-versed in astrology Will have a different take on The Monadology. Leibniz was a big fan of a book called The Astronomicon. In fact, I believe that just as Isaac newton what is a closet alchemist, Leibniz, a devout Lutheran, was a closet astrologer. His system was trying to reconcile Christianity and the Christian God with the formidable ancient inheritance of astrology, which comprise much of the science of the day 1600’s.
