Hubbry Logo
Gottfried Wilhelm LeibnizGottfried Wilhelm LeibnizMain
Open search
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Community hub
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz
from Wikipedia

Key Information

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (or Leibnitz;[a] 1 July 1646 [O.S. 21 June] – 14 November 1716) was a German polymath active as a mathematician, philosopher, scientist and diplomat who is credited, alongside Isaac Newton, with the creation of calculus in addition to many other branches of mathematics, such as binary arithmetic and statistics. Leibniz has been called the "last universal genius" due to his vast expertise across fields, which became a rarity after his lifetime with the coming of the Industrial Revolution and the spread of specialized labour.[15] He is a prominent figure in both the history of philosophy and the history of mathematics. He wrote works on philosophy, theology, ethics, politics, law, history, philology, games, music, and other studies. Leibniz also made major contributions to physics and technology, and anticipated notions that surfaced much later in probability theory, biology, medicine, geology, psychology, linguistics and computer science.

Leibniz contributed to the field of library science, developing a cataloguing system (at the Herzog August Library in Wolfenbüttel, Germany) that came to serve as a model for many of Europe's largest libraries.[16][17] His contributions to a wide range of subjects were scattered in various learned journals, in tens of thousands of letters and in unpublished manuscripts. He wrote in several languages, primarily in Latin, French and German.[b][c]

As a philosopher, he was a leading representative of 17th-century rationalism and idealism. As a mathematician, his major achievement was the development of differential and integral calculus, independently of Newton's contemporaneous developments.[20] Leibniz's notation has been favoured as the conventional and more exact expression of calculus.[21][22][23] In addition to his work on calculus, he is credited with devising the modern binary number system[24] which is the basis of modern communications and digital computing[25] (though the English astronomer Thomas Harriot had devised the same system decades before[26]). He envisioned the field of combinatorial topology as early as 1679,[27] and helped initiate the field of fractional calculus.[28][29][page needed]

In the 20th century, Leibniz's notions of the law of continuity and the transcendental law of homogeneity found a consistent mathematical formulation by means of non-standard analysis. He was also a pioneer in the field of mechanical calculators. While working on adding automatic multiplication and division to Pascal's calculator, he was the first to describe a pinwheel calculator in 1685[30] and invented the Leibniz wheel, later used in the arithmometer, the first mass-produced mechanical calculator.

In philosophy and theology, Leibniz is most noted for his optimism, i.e. his conclusion that our world is, in a qualified sense, the best possible world that God could have created, a view sometimes lampooned by other thinkers, such as Voltaire in his satirical novella Candide. Leibniz, along with René Descartes and Baruch Spinoza, was one of the three influential early modern rationalists. His philosophy also assimilates elements of the scholastic tradition, notably the assumption that some substantive knowledge of reality can be achieved by reasoning from first principles or prior definitions. The work of Leibniz anticipated modern logic and still influences contemporary analytic philosophy, such as its adopted use of the term possible world to define modal notions.

Biography

[edit]

Early life

[edit]
Leibniz monument  [de ] at Leipzig University

Gottfried Leibniz was born on 1 July [OS: 21 June] 1646, in Leipzig, in the Electorate of Saxony of the Holy Roman Empire (now in the German state of Saxony) to Friedrich Leibniz (1597–1652) and Catharina Schmuck (1621–1664).[31][page needed] He was baptized two days later at St. Nicholas Church, Leipzig; his godfather was the Lutheran theologian Martin Geier [de].[32] His father died when he was six years old, and Leibniz was raised by his mother.[33][failed verification]

Leibniz's father had been a Professor of Moral Philosophy at the University of Leipzig, where he also served as dean of philosophy. The boy inherited his father's personal library. He was given free access to it from the age of seven, shortly after his father's death. While Leibniz's schoolwork was largely confined to the study of a small canon of authorities, his father's library enabled him to study a wide variety of advanced philosophical and theological works – ones that he would not have otherwise been able to read until his college years.[34] Access to his father's library, largely written in Latin, also led to his proficiency in the Latin language, which he achieved by the age of 12. At the age of 13 he composed 300 hexameters of Latin verse in a single morning for a special event at school.[35]

In April 1661 he enrolled in his father's former university at age 14.[36][1][37] There he was guided, among others, by Jakob Thomasius, previously a student of Friedrich. Leibniz completed his bachelor's degree in Philosophy in December 1662. He defended his Disputatio Metaphysical de Principio Individual ('Metaphysical Disputation on the Principle of Individuation'),[38] which addressed the principle of individuation, on 9 June 1663 [O.S. 30 May], presenting an early version of monadic substance theory. Leibniz earned his master's degree in Philosophy on 7 February 1664. In December 1664 he published and defended a dissertation Specimen Quaestionum Philosophicarum ex Jure collectarum (transl. An Essay of Collected Philosophical Problems of Right),[38] arguing for both a theoretical and a pedagogical relationship between philosophy and law. After one year of legal studies, he was awarded his bachelor's degree in Law on 28 September 1665.[39] His dissertation was titled De conditionibus (transl. On Conditions).[38]

In early 1666, at age 19, Leibniz wrote his first book, De Arte Combinatoria (transl. On the Combinatorial Art), the first part of which was also his habilitation thesis in Philosophy, which he defended in March 1666.[38][d] De Arte Combinatoria was inspired by Ramon Llull's Ars Magna[40] and contained a proof of the existence of God, cast in geometrical form, and based on the argument from motion.[citation needed]

His next goal was to earn his license and Doctorate in Law, which normally required three years of study. In 1666, the University of Leipzig turned down Leibniz's doctoral application and refused to grant him a Doctorate in Law, most likely due to his relative youth.[41][42] Leibniz subsequently left Leipzig.[43]

Leibniz then enrolled in the University of Altdorf and quickly submitted a thesis, which he had probably been working on earlier in Leipzig.[44] The title of his thesis was Disputatio Inauguralis de Casibus Perplexis in Jure (transl. Inaugural Disputation on Ambiguous Legal Cases).[38] Leibniz earned his license to practice law and his Doctorate in Law in November 1666. He next declined the offer of an academic appointment at Altdorf, saying that "my thoughts were turned in an entirely different direction".[45]

As an adult, Leibniz often introduced himself as "Gottfried von Leibniz". Many posthumously published editions of his writings presented his name on the title page as "Freiherr G. W. von Leibniz." However, no document has ever been found from any contemporary government that stated his appointment to any form of nobility.[46]

1666–1676

[edit]
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

Leibniz's first position was as a salaried secretary to an alchemical society in Nuremberg.[47] He knew fairly little about the subject at that time but presented himself as deeply learned. He soon met Johann Christian von Boyneburg (1622–1672), the dismissed chief minister of the Elector of Mainz, Johann Philipp von Schönborn.[48] Von Boyneburg hired Leibniz as an assistant, and shortly thereafter reconciled with the Elector and introduced Leibniz to him. Leibniz then dedicated an essay on law to the Elector in the hope of obtaining employment. The stratagem worked; the Elector asked Leibniz to assist with the redrafting of the legal code for the Electorate.[49] In 1669, Leibniz was appointed assessor in the Court of Appeal. Although von Boyneburg died late in 1672, Leibniz remained under the employment of his widow until she dismissed him in 1674.[50]

Von Boyneburg did much to promote Leibniz's reputation, and the latter's memoranda and letters began to attract favourable notice. After Leibniz's service to the Elector there soon followed a diplomatic role. He published an essay, under the pseudonym of a fictitious Polish nobleman, arguing (unsuccessfully) for the German candidate for the Polish crown. The main force in European geopolitics during Leibniz's adult life was the ambition of Louis XIV, backed by French military and economic might. Meanwhile, the Thirty Years' War had left German-speaking Europe exhausted, fragmented, and economically backward. Leibniz proposed to protect German-speaking Europe by distracting Louis as follows: France would be invited to take Egypt as a stepping stone towards an eventual conquest of the Dutch East Indies. In return, France would agree to leave Germany and the Netherlands undisturbed. This plan obtained the Elector's cautious support. In 1672, the French government invited Leibniz to Paris for discussion,[51] but the plan was soon overtaken by the outbreak of the Franco-Dutch War and became irrelevant. Napoleon's failed invasion of Egypt in 1798 can be seen as an unwitting, late implementation of Leibniz's plan, after the Eastern hemisphere colonial supremacy in Europe had already passed from the Dutch to the British.

Thus Leibniz went to Paris in 1672. Soon after arriving, he met Dutch physicist and mathematician Christiaan Huygens and realised that his own knowledge of mathematics and physics was lacking. With Huygens as his mentor, he began a program of self-study that soon pushed him to making major contributions to both subjects, including discovering his version of the differential and integral calculus. He met Nicolas Malebranche and Antoine Arnauld, the leading French philosophers of the day, and studied the writings of Descartes and Pascal, unpublished as well as published.[52] He befriended a German mathematician, Ehrenfried Walther von Tschirnhaus; they corresponded for the rest of their lives.[citation needed]

Stepped reckoner

When it became clear that France would not implement its part of Leibniz's Egyptian plan, the Elector sent his nephew, escorted by Leibniz, on a related mission to the English government in London, early in 1673.[53] There Leibniz met Henry Oldenburg and John Collins. He met with the Royal Society where he demonstrated a calculating machine that he had designed and had been building since 1670.[24] The machine was able to execute all four basic operations (adding, subtracting, multiplying, and dividing), and the society quickly made him an external member.[citation needed]

The mission ended quickly when news of the Elector's death (12 February 1673) reached them. Leibniz promptly returned to Paris and not, as had been planned, to Mainz.[54] The sudden deaths of his two patrons in the same winter meant that Leibniz had to find a new basis for his career.[citation needed]

In this regard, a 1669 invitation from Duke John Frederick of Brunswick to visit Hanover proved to have been fateful. Leibniz had declined the invitation, but had begun corresponding with the duke in 1671. In 1673, the duke offered Leibniz the post of counsellor. Leibniz very reluctantly accepted the position two years later, only after it became clear that no employment was forthcoming in Paris, whose intellectual stimulation he relished, or with the Habsburg imperial court.[55]

In 1675 he tried to get admitted to the French Academy of Sciences as a foreign honorary member, but it was considered that there were already enough foreigners there and so no invitation came. He left Paris in October 1676.

House of Hanover, 1676–1716

[edit]
Portrait of Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, Public Library of Hanover, 1703

Leibniz managed to delay his arrival in Hanover until the end of 1676 after making one more short journey to London, where Newton accused him of having seen his unpublished work on calculus in advance.[e] This was alleged to be evidence supporting the accusation, made decades later, that he had stolen calculus from Newton. On the journey from London to Hanover, Leibniz stopped in The Hague where he met van Leeuwenhoek, the discoverer of microorganisms. He also spent several days in intense discussion with Spinoza, who had just completed, but had not published, his masterwork, the Ethics.[57] Spinoza died very shortly after Leibniz's visit.

In 1677, he was promoted, at his request, to Privy Counselor of Justice, a post he held for the rest of his life. Leibniz served three consecutive rulers of the House of Brunswick as historian, political adviser, and most consequentially, as librarian of the ducal library. He thenceforth employed his pen on all the various political, historical, and theological matters involving the House of Brunswick; the resulting documents form a valuable part of the historical record for the period.

Leibniz began promoting a project to use windmills to improve the mining operations in the Harz mountains. This project did little to improve mining operations and was shut down by Duke Ernst August in 1685.[55]

Sophia honours Leibniz symbolically with the laurel wreath in a relief by Karl Gundelach, [de ] part of the history frieze on the New Town Hall in Hanover

Among the few people in north Germany to accept Leibniz were the Electress Sophia of Hanover (1630–1714), her daughter Sophia Charlotte of Hanover (1668–1705), the Queen of Prussia and his avowed disciple, and Caroline of Ansbach, the consort of her grandson, the future George II. To each of these women he was correspondent, adviser, and friend. In turn, they all approved of Leibniz more than did their spouses and the future king George I of Great Britain.[f]

The population of Hanover was only about 10,000, and its provinciality eventually grated on Leibniz. Nevertheless, to be a major courtier to the House of Brunswick was quite an honour, especially in light of the meteoric rise in the prestige of that House during Leibniz's association with it. In 1692, the Duke of Brunswick became a hereditary Elector of the Holy Roman Empire. The British Act of Settlement 1701 designated the Electress Sophia and her descent as the royal family of England, once both King William III and his sister-in-law and successor, Queen Anne, were dead. Leibniz played a role in the initiatives and negotiations leading up to that Act, but not always an effective one. For example, something he published anonymously in England, thinking to promote the Brunswick cause, was formally censured by the British Parliament.

The Brunswicks tolerated the enormous effort Leibniz devoted to intellectual pursuits unrelated to his duties as a courtier, pursuits such as perfecting calculus, writing about other mathematics, logic, physics, and philosophy, and keeping up a vast correspondence. He began working on calculus in 1674; the earliest evidence of its use in his surviving notebooks is 1675. By 1677 he had a coherent system in hand, but did not publish it until 1684. Leibniz's most important mathematical papers were published between 1682 and 1692, usually in a journal which he and Otto Mencke founded in 1682, the Acta Eruditorum. That journal played a key role in advancing his mathematical and scientific reputation, which in turn enhanced his eminence in diplomacy, history, theology, and philosophy.

Pages from Leibniz's papers in the National Library of Poland

The Elector Ernest Augustus commissioned Leibniz to write a history of the House of Brunswick, going back to the time of Charlemagne or earlier, hoping that the resulting book would advance his dynastic ambitions. From 1687 to 1690, Leibniz traveled extensively in Germany, Austria, and Italy, seeking and finding archival materials bearing on this project. Decades went by but no history appeared; the next Elector became quite annoyed at Leibniz's apparent dilatoriness. Leibniz never finished the project, in part because of his huge output on many other fronts, but also because he insisted on writing a meticulously researched and erudite book based on archival sources, when his patrons would have been quite happy with a short popular book, one perhaps little more than a genealogy with commentary, to be completed in three years or less. Leibniz was appointed Librarian of the Herzog August Library in Wolfenbüttel, Lower Saxony, in 1691. Three volumes of the Scriptores rerum Brunsvicensium were published from 1707 to 1711.[59][page needed]

In 1708, John Keill, writing in the journal of the Royal Society and with Newton's presumed blessing, accused Leibniz of having plagiarised Newton's calculus.[60] Thus began the calculus priority dispute which darkened the remainder of Leibniz's life. A formal investigation by the Royal Society (in which Newton was an unacknowledged participant), undertaken in response to Leibniz's demand for a retraction, upheld Keill's charge. Historians of mathematics writing since 1900 or so have tended to acquit Leibniz, pointing to important differences between Leibniz's and Newton's versions of calculus.

In 1712, Leibniz began a two-year residence in Vienna, where he was appointed Imperial Court Councillor to the Habsburgs. On the death of Queen Anne in 1714, Elector George Louis became King George I of Great Britain, under the terms of the 1701 Act of Settlement. Even though Leibniz had done much to bring about this happy event, it was not to be his hour of glory. Despite the intercession of the Princess of Wales, Caroline of Ansbach, George I forbade Leibniz to join him in London until he completed at least one volume of the history of the Brunswick family his father had commissioned nearly 30 years earlier. Moreover, for George I to include Leibniz in his London court would have been deemed insulting to Newton, who was seen as having won the calculus priority dispute and whose standing in British official circles could not have been higher. Finally, his dear friend and defender, the Dowager Electress Sophia, died in 1714. In 1716, while traveling in northern Europe, the Russian Tsar Peter the Great stopped in Bad Pyrmont and met Leibniz, who took interest in Russian matters since 1708 and was appointed advisor in 1711.[61]

Death

[edit]
Replica of the Leibniz bust in the Leibniz temple in Hanover

Leibniz died in Hanover in 1716, and was interred in the New Town Church (Neustädter Kirche). At the time, he was so out of favour that neither George I (who happened to be near Hanover at that time) nor any fellow courtier other than his personal secretary attended the funeral. Even though Leibniz was a life member of the Royal Society and the Berlin Academy of Sciences, neither organization saw fit to honour his death. His grave went unmarked for more than 50 years. He was, however, eulogized by Fontenelle, before the French Academy of Sciences in Paris, which had admitted him as a foreign member in 1700. The eulogy was composed at the behest of the Duchess of Orleans, a niece of the Electress Sophia.

Personal life

[edit]

Leibniz never married. He proposed to an unknown woman at age 50, but changed his mind when she took too long to decide.[62] He complained on occasion about money, but the fair sum he left to his sole heir, his sister's stepson, proved that the Brunswicks had paid him fairly well. In his diplomatic endeavors, he at times verged on the unscrupulous, as was often the case with professional diplomats of his day. On several occasions, Leibniz backdated and altered personal manuscripts, actions which put him in a bad light during the calculus controversy.[63]

He was charming, well-mannered, and not without humor and imagination.[g] He had many friends and admirers all over Europe. He was identified as a Protestant and a philosophical theist.[67][68][69][70] Leibniz remained committed to Trinitarian Christianity throughout his life.[71]

Philosophy

[edit]

Leibniz's philosophical thinking appears fragmented because his philosophical writings consist mainly of a multitude of short pieces: journal articles, manuscripts published long after his death, and letters to correspondents. He wrote two book-length philosophical treatises, of which only the Théodicée ('theodicy') of 1710 was published in his lifetime.

Leibniz dated his beginning as a philosopher to his Discourse on Metaphysics, which he composed in 1686 as a commentary on a running dispute between Nicolas Malebranche and Antoine Arnauld. This led to an extensive correspondence with Arnauld;[72][73] it and the Discourse were not published until the 19th century. In 1695, Leibniz made his public entrée into European philosophy with a journal article titled "New System of the Nature and Communication of Substances".[74][75][76] Between 1695 and 1705, he composed his New Essays on Human Understanding, a lengthy commentary on John Locke's 1690 An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, but upon learning of Locke's 1704 death, lost the desire to publish it, so that the New Essays were not published until 1765. The Monadologie, composed in 1714 and published posthumously, consists of 90 aphorisms.

Leibniz also wrote a short paper, "Primae veritates" ('first truths'), first published by Louis Couturat in 1903[77][h] summarizing his views on metaphysics. The paper is undated; that he wrote it while in Vienna in 1689 was determined only in 1999, when the ongoing historical-critical scholarly editing of the collected papers of Leibniz by the editorial project Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe ('Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Complete Writings and Letters'), the Leibniz-Edition ('Leibniz edition') colloqually, finally published Leibniz's philosophical writings for the period 1677–1690.[80] Couturat's reading of this paper influenced much 20th-century thinking about Leibniz, especially among analytic philosophers. After a meticulous study (informed by the 1999 additions to the Leibniz-Edition) of all of Leibniz's philosophical writings up to 1688, Mercer (2001) disagreed with Couturat's reading.[clarification needed]

Leibniz met Baruch Spinoza in 1676, read some of his unpublished writings, and was influenced by some of Spinoza's ideas.[citation needed] While Leibniz befriended Spinoza and admired his powerful intellect, he was also dismayed by Spinoza's conclusions,[81][82][83] especially when these were inconsistent with Christian orthodoxy.

Unlike Descartes and Spinoza, Leibniz had a university education in philosophy. He was influenced by his Leipzig professor Jakob Thomasius, who also supervised his Bachelor of Arts thesis in philosophy.[9] Leibniz also read Francisco Suárez, a Spanish Jesuit respected even in Lutheran universities. Leibniz was deeply interested in the new methods and conclusions of Descartes, Huygens, Newton, and Boyle, but the established philosophical ideas in which he was educated influenced his view of their work.

Principles

[edit]

Leibniz variously invoked one or another of seven fundamental philosophical Principles:[84]

  • Identity/contradiction. If a proposition is true, then its negation is false and vice versa.
  • Identity of indiscernibles. Two distinct things cannot have all their properties in common. If every predicate possessed by x is also possessed by y and vice versa, then entities x and y are identical; to suppose two things indiscernible is to suppose the same thing under two names. The "identity of indiscernibles" is frequently invoked in modern logic and philosophy. It has attracted the most controversy and criticism, especially from corpuscular philosophy and quantum mechanics. The converse of this is often called Leibniz's law, or the indiscernibility of identicals, which is mostly uncontroversial.
  • Sufficient reason. "There must be a sufficient reason for anything to exist, for any event to occur, for any truth to obtain."[85]
  • Pre-established harmony.[86][i] "[T]he appropriate nature of each substance brings it about that what happens to one corresponds to what happens to all the others, without, however, their acting upon one another directly" (Discourse on Metaphysics, XIV).[citation needed] A dropped glass shatters because it "knows" it has hit the ground, and not because the impact with the ground "compels" the glass to split.
  • Law of continuity. Natura non facit saltus[87][j][90][91] (lit.'Nature does not make jumps').
  • Optimism. "God assuredly always chooses the best."[92]
  • Plenitude. Leibniz believed that the best of all possible worlds would actualize every genuine possibility, and argued in his Théodicée that this best of all possible worlds will contain all possibilities, with our finite experience of eternity giving no reason to dispute nature's perfection.[93]

Leibniz would on occasion give a rational defense of a specific principle, but more often took them for granted.[k]

Monads

[edit]
A page from Leibniz's manuscript of the Monadology

Leibniz's best known contribution to metaphysics is his theory of monads, as exposited in Monadologie. He proposes his theory that the universe is made of an infinite number of simple substances known as monads.[95] Monads can also be compared to the corpuscles of the mechanical philosophy of René Descartes and others. These simple substances or monads are the "ultimate units of existence in nature". Monads have no parts but still exist by the qualities that they have. These qualities are continuously changing over time, and each monad is unique. They are also not affected by time and are subject to only creation and annihilation.[96] Monads are centers of force; substance is force, while space, matter, and motion are merely phenomenal. He argued, against Newton, that space, time, and motion are completely relative:[97] "As for my own opinion, I have said more than once, that I hold space to be something merely relative, as time is, that I hold it to be an order of coexistences, as time is an order of successions."[98] Einstein, who called himself a "Leibnizian", wrote in the introduction to Max Jammer's book Concepts of Space that Leibnizianism was superior to Newtonianism, and his ideas would have dominated over Newton's had it not been for the poor technological tools of the time; Joseph Agassi argues that Leibniz paved the way for Einstein's theory of relativity.[99]

Leibniz's proof of God can be summarized in the Théodicée.[100] Reason is governed by the principle of contradiction and the principle of sufficient reason. Using the principle of reasoning, Leibniz concluded that the first reason of all things is God.[100] All that we see and experience is subject to change, and the fact that this world is contingent can be explained by the possibility of the world being arranged differently in space and time. The contingent world must have some necessary reason for its existence. Leibniz uses a geometry book as an example to explain his reasoning. If this book was copied from an infinite chain of copies, there must be some reason for the content of the book.[101] Leibniz concluded that there must be the "monas monadum" or God.

The ontological essence of a monad is its irreducible simplicity. Unlike atoms, monads possess no material or spatial character. They also differ from atoms by their complete mutual independence, so that interactions among monads are only apparent. Instead, by virtue of the principle of pre-established harmony, each monad follows a pre-programmed set of "instructions" peculiar to itself, so that a monad "knows" what to do at each moment. By virtue of these intrinsic instructions, each monad is like a little mirror of the universe. Monads need not be "small"; e.g., each human being constitutes a monad, in which case free will is problematic.

Monads are purported to have gotten rid of the problematic:

  • interaction between mind and matter arising in the system of Descartes;
  • lack of individuation inherent to the system of Spinoza, which represents individual creatures as merely accidental.

Theodicy and optimism

[edit]

The Théodicée[l] tries to justify the apparent imperfections of the world by claiming that it is optimal among all possible worlds. It must be the best possible and most balanced world, because it was created by an all-powerful and all-knowing God, who would not choose to create an imperfect world if a better world could be known to him or possible to exist. In effect, apparent flaws that can be identified in this world must exist in every possible world, because otherwise God would have chosen to create the world that excluded those flaws.[102]

Leibniz asserted that the truths of theology (religion) and philosophy cannot contradict each other, since reason and faith are both "gifts of God" so that their conflict would imply God contending against himself. The Théodicée is Leibniz's attempt to reconcile his personal philosophical system with his interpretation of the tenets of Christianity.[103][page needed] This project was motivated in part by Leibniz's belief, shared by many philosophers and theologians during the Enlightenment, in the rational and enlightened nature of the Christian religion. It was also shaped by Leibniz's belief in the perfectibility of human nature (if humanity relied on correct philosophy and religion as a guide), and by his belief that metaphysical necessity must have a rational or logical foundation, even if this metaphysical causality seemed inexplicable in terms of physical necessity (the natural laws identified by science).

In the view of Leibniz, because reason and faith must be entirely reconciled, any tenet of faith which could not be defended by reason must be rejected. Leibniz then approached one of the central criticisms of Christian theism:[103][page needed] if God is all good, all wise, and all powerful, then how did evil come into the world? The answer (according to Leibniz) is that, while God is indeed unlimited in wisdom and power, his human creations, as creations, are limited both in their wisdom and in their will (power to act). This predisposes humans to false beliefs, wrong decisions, and ineffective actions in the exercise of their free will. God does not arbitrarily inflict pain and suffering on humans; rather he permits both moral evil (sin) and physical evil (pain and suffering) as the necessary consequences of metaphysical evil (imperfection), as a means by which humans can identify and correct their erroneous decisions, and as a contrast to true good.[104]

Further, although human actions flow from prior causes that ultimately arise in God and therefore are known to God as metaphysical certainties, an individual's free will is exercised within natural laws, where choices are merely contingently necessary and to be decided in the event by a "wonderful spontaneity" that provides individuals with an escape from rigorous predestination.

Discourse on Metaphysics

[edit]

For Leibniz, "God is an absolutely perfect being". He describes this perfection later in section VI as the simplest form of something with the most substantial outcome (VI[full citation needed]). Along these lines, he declares that every type of perfection "pertains to him (God) in the highest degree" (I[full citation needed]). Even though his types of perfections are not specifically drawn out, Leibniz highlights the one thing that, to him, does certify imperfections and proves that God is perfect: "that one acts imperfectly if he acts with less perfection than he is capable of", and since God is a perfect being, he cannot act imperfectly (III[full citation needed]). Because God cannot act imperfectly, the decisions he makes pertaining to the world must be perfect. Leibniz also comforts readers, stating that because he has done everything to the most perfect degree; those who love him cannot be injured. However, to love God is a subject of difficulty as Leibniz believes that we are "not disposed to wish for that which God desires" because we have the ability to alter our disposition (IV[full citation needed]). In accordance with this, many act as rebels, but Leibniz says that the only way we can truly love God is by being content "with all that comes to us according to his will" (IV[full citation needed]).

Because God is "an absolutely perfect being" (I[full citation needed]), Leibniz argues that God would be acting imperfectly if he acted with any less perfection than what he is able of (III[full citation needed]). His syllogism then ends with the statement that God has made the world perfectly in all ways. This also affects how we should view God and his will. Leibniz states that, in lieu of God's will, we have to understand that God "is the best of all masters" and he will know when his good succeeds, so we, therefore, must act in conformity to his good will – or as much of it as we understand (IV[full citation needed]). In our view of God, Leibniz declares that we cannot admire the work solely because of the maker, lest we mar the glory and love God in doing so. Instead, we must admire the maker for the work he has done (II[full citation needed]). Effectively, Leibniz states that if we say the earth is good because of the will of God, and not good according to some standards of goodness, then how can we praise God for what he has done if contrary actions are also praiseworthy by this definition (II[full citation needed]). Leibniz then asserts that different principles and geometry cannot simply be from the will of God, but must follow from his understanding.[105]

Leibniz wrote: "Why is there something rather than nothing? The sufficient reason ... is found in a substance which ... is a necessary being bearing the reason for its existence within itself."[106] Martin Heidegger called this question "the fundamental question of metaphysics".[107][108]

Symbolic thought and rational resolution of disputes

[edit]

Leibniz believed that much of human reasoning could be reduced to calculations of a sort, and that such calculations could resolve many differences of opinion:[dubiousdiscuss][109][110][111]

The only way to rectify our reasonings is to make them as tangible as those of the Mathematicians, so that we can find our error at a glance, and when there are disputes among persons, we can simply say: Let us calculate, without further ado, to see who is right.

Leibniz's calculus ratiocinator, which resembles symbolic logic, can be viewed as a way of making such calculations feasible. Leibniz wrote memoranda[m] that can now be read as groping attempts to get symbolic logic – and thus his calculus – off the ground. These writings remained unpublished until the appearance of a selection edited by Carl Immanuel Gerhardt (1859). Louis Couturat published a selection in 1901; by this time the main developments of modern logic had been created by Charles Sanders Peirce and by Gottlob Frege.

Leibniz thought symbols were important for human understanding. He attached so much importance to the development of good notations that he attributed all his discoveries in mathematics to this. His notation for calculus is an example of his skill in this regard. Leibniz's passion for symbols and notation, as well as his belief that these are essential to a well-running logic and mathematics, made him a precursor of semiotics.[112]

But Leibniz took his speculations much further. Defining a character as any written sign, he then defined a "real" character as one that represents an idea directly and not simply as the word embodying the idea. Some real characters, such as the notation of logic, serve only to facilitate reasoning. Many characters well known in his day, including Egyptian hieroglyphics, Chinese characters, and the symbols of astronomy and chemistry, he deemed not real.[n] Instead, he proposed the creation of a characteristica universalis or "universal characteristic", built on an alphabet of human thought in which each fundamental concept would be represented by a unique "real" character:[o]

It is obvious that if we could find characters or signs suited for expressing all our thoughts as clearly and as exactly as arithmetic expresses numbers or geometry expresses lines, we could do in all matters insofar as they are subject to reasoning all that we can do in arithmetic and geometry. For all investigations which depend on reasoning would be carried out by transposing these characters and by a species of calculus.

Complex thoughts would be represented by combining characters for simpler thoughts. Leibniz saw that the uniqueness of prime factorization suggests a central role for prime numbers in the universal characteristic, a striking anticipation of Gödel numbering. Granted, there is no intuitive or mnemonic way to number any set of elementary concepts using the prime numbers.

Because Leibniz was a mathematical novice when he first wrote about the characteristic, at first he did not conceive it as an algebra but rather as a universal language or script. Only in 1676 did he conceive of a kind of "algebra of thought", modeled on and including conventional algebra and its notation. The resulting characteristic included a logical calculus, some combinatorics, algebra, his analysis situs (geometry of situation), a universal concept language, and more. What Leibniz actually intended by his characteristica universalis and calculus ratiocinator, and the extent to which modern formal logic does justice to calculus, may never be established.[p] Leibniz's idea of reasoning through a universal language of symbols and calculations remarkably foreshadows great 20th-century developments in formal systems, such as Turing completeness, where computation was used to define equivalent universal languages (see Turing degree).

Formal logic

[edit]

Leibniz has been noted as one of the most important logicians between the times of Aristotle and Gottlob Frege.[117] Leibniz enunciated the principal properties of what we now call conjunction, disjunction, negation, identity, set inclusion, and the empty set. The principles of Leibniz's logic and, arguably, of his whole philosophy, reduce to two:

  1. All our ideas are compounded from a very small number of simple ideas, which form the alphabet of human thought.
  2. Complex ideas proceed from these simple ideas by a uniform and symmetrical combination, analogous to arithmetical multiplication.

The formal logic that emerged early in the 20th century also requires, at minimum, unary negation and quantified variables ranging over some universe of discourse.

Leibniz published nothing on formal logic in his lifetime; most of what he wrote on the subject consists of working drafts. In his History of Western Philosophy, Bertrand Russell went so far as to claim that Leibniz had developed logic in his unpublished writings to a level which was reached only 200 years later.

Russell's principal work on Leibniz found that many of Leibniz's most startling philosophical ideas and claims (e.g., that each of the fundamental monads mirrors the whole universe) follow logically from Leibniz's conscious choice to reject relations between things as unreal. He regarded such relations as (real) qualities of things (Leibniz admitted unary predicates only): For him, "Mary is the mother of John" describes separate qualities of Mary and of John. This view contrasts with the relational logic of De Morgan, Peirce, Schröder and Russell himself, now standard in predicate logic. Notably, Leibniz also declared space and time to be inherently relational.[118]

Leibniz's 1690 discovery of his algebra of concepts[119][120] (deductively equivalent to the Boolean algebra)[121] and the associated metaphysics, are of interest in present-day computational metaphysics.[122]

Mathematics

[edit]

Although the mathematical notion of function was implicit in trigonometric and logarithmic tables, which existed in his day, Leibniz was the first, in 1692 and 1694, to employ it explicitly, to denote any of several geometric concepts derived from a curve, such as abscissa, ordinate, tangent, chord, and the perpendicular (see History of the function concept).[123] In the 18th century, "function" lost these geometrical associations. Leibniz was also one of the pioneers in actuarial science, calculating the purchase price of life annuities and the liquidation of a state's debt.[124]

Leibniz's research into formal logic, also relevant to mathematics, is discussed in the preceding section. The best overview of Leibniz's writings on calculus may be found in Bos (1974).[125]

Leibniz, who invented one of the earliest mechanical calculators, said of calculation:[126] "For it is unworthy of excellent men to lose hours like slaves in the labour of calculation which could safely be relegated to anyone else if machines were used."[127]

Linear systems

[edit]

Leibniz arranged the coefficients of a system of linear equations into an array, now called a matrix, in order to find a solution to the system if it existed.[128] This method was later called Gaussian elimination. Leibniz laid down the foundations and theory of determinants, although the Japanese mathematician Seki Takakazu also discovered determinants independently of Leibniz.[129][130] His works show calculating the determinants using cofactors.[131] Calculating the determinant using cofactors is named the Leibniz formula. Finding the determinant of a matrix using this method proves impractical with large n, requiring to calculate n! products and the number of n-permutations.[132] He also solved systems of linear equations using determinants, which is now called Cramer's rule. This method for solving systems of linear equations based on determinants was found in 1684 by Leibniz (Gabriel Cramer published his findings in 1750).[130] Although Gaussian elimination requires arithmetic operations, linear algebra textbooks still teach cofactor expansion before LU factorization.[133][134]

Geometry

[edit]

The Leibniz formula for π states that

Leibniz wrote that circles "can most simply be expressed by this series, that is, the aggregate of fractions alternately added and subtracted".[135] However this formula is only accurate with a large number of terms, using 10,000,000 terms to obtain the correct value of π/4 to 8 decimal places.[136] Leibniz attempted to create a definition for a straight line while attempting to prove the parallel postulate.[137] While most mathematicians defined a straight line as the shortest line between two points, Leibniz believed that this was merely a property of a straight line rather than the definition.[138]

Calculus

[edit]

Leibniz is credited, along with Isaac Newton, with the invention of calculus (differential and integral calculus). According to Leibniz's notebooks, a critical breakthrough occurred on 11 November 1675, when he employed integral calculus for the first time to find the area under the graph of a function y = f(x).[139] He introduced several notations used to this day, for instance the integral sign (), representing an elongated S, from the Latin word summa, and the d used for differentials (), from the Latin word differentia. Leibniz did not publish anything about his calculus until 1684.[q] Leibniz expressed the inverse relation of integration and differentiation, later called the fundamental theorem of calculus, by means of a figure[141] in his 1693 paper Supplementum geometriae dimensoriae....[142] However, James Gregory is credited for the theorem's discovery in geometric form, Isaac Barrow proved a more generalized geometric version, and Newton developed supporting theory. The concept became more transparent as developed through Leibniz's formalism and new notation.[143] The product rule of differential calculus is still called "Leibniz's law". In addition, the theorem that tells how and when to differentiate under the integral sign is called the Leibniz integral rule.

Leibniz exploited infinitesimals in developing calculus, manipulating them in ways suggesting that they had paradoxical algebraic properties. George Berkeley, in a tract called The Analyst and also in De Motu, criticized these. A recent study argues that Leibnizian calculus was free of contradictions, and was better grounded than Berkeley's empiricist criticisms.[144]

Leibniz introduced fractional calculus in a letter written to Guillaume de l'Hôpital in 1695.[29][page needed] At the same time, Leibniz wrote to Johann Bernoulli about derivatives of "general order".[28] In the correspondence between Leibniz and John Wallis in 1697, Wallis's infinite product for π is discussed. Leibniz suggested using differential calculus to achieve this result. Leibniz further used the notation to denote the derivative of order .[28]

From 1711 until his death, Leibniz was engaged in a dispute with John Keill, Newton and others, over whether Leibniz had invented calculus independently of Newton.

The use of infinitesimals in mathematics was frowned upon by followers of Karl Weierstrass,[145] but survived in science and engineering, and even in rigorous mathematics, via the fundamental computational device known as the differential. Beginning in 1960, Abraham Robinson worked out a rigorous foundation for Leibniz's infinitesimals, using model theory, in the context of a field of hyperreal numbers. The resulting non-standard analysis can be seen as a belated vindication of Leibniz's mathematical reasoning. Robinson's transfer principle is a mathematical implementation of Leibniz's heuristic law of continuity, while the standard part function implements the Leibnizian transcendental law of homogeneity.

Topology

[edit]

Leibniz was the first to use the term analysis situs,[146] later used in the 19th century to refer to what is now known as topology. There are two takes on this situation. On the one hand, Mates, citing a 1954 paper in German by Jacob Freudenthal, argues:[147]

Although for Leibniz the situs of a sequence of points is completely determined by the distance between them and is altered if those distances are altered, his admirer Euler, in the famous 1736 paper solving the Königsberg Bridge Problem and its generalizations, used the term geometria situs in such a sense that the situs remains unchanged under topological deformations. He mistakenly credits Leibniz with originating this concept. ... [It] is sometimes not realized that Leibniz used the term in an entirely different sense and hence can hardly be considered the founder of that part of mathematics.

But Hideaki Hirano argues differently, quoting Mandelbrot:[148]

To sample Leibniz' scientific works is a sobering experience. Next to calculus, and to other thoughts that have been carried out to completion, the number and variety of premonitory thrusts is overwhelming. We saw examples in 'packing', ... My Leibniz mania is further reinforced by finding that for one moment its hero attached importance to geometric scaling. In Euclidis Prota ..., which is an attempt to tighten Euclid's axioms, he states ...: 'I have diverse definitions for the straight line. The straight line is a curve, any part of which is similar to the whole, and it alone has this property, not only among curves but among sets.' This claim can be proved today.

Thus the fractal geometry promoted by Mandelbrot drew on Leibniz's notions of self-similarity and the principle of continuity: Natura non facit saltus.[87][r][90][91] We also see that when Leibniz wrote, in a metaphysical vein, that "the straight line is a curve, any part of which is similar to the whole", he was anticipating topology by more than two centuries. As for "packing", Leibniz told his friend and correspondent Des Bosses to imagine a circle, then to inscribe within it three congruent circles with maximum radius; the latter smaller circles could be filled with three even smaller circles by the same procedure. This process can be continued infinitely, from which arises a good idea of self-similarity. Leibniz's improvement of Euclid's axiom contains the same concept.

He envisioned the field of combinatorial topology as early as 1679, in his work titled Characteristica Geometrica, as he "tried to formulate basic geometric properties of figures, to use special symbols to represent them, and to combine these properties under operations so as to produce new ones."[27]

Science and engineering

[edit]

Leibniz's writings are currently discussed, not only for their anticipations and possible discoveries not yet recognized, but as ways of advancing present knowledge. Much of his writing on physics is included in Gerhardt's Mathematical Writings.

Physics

[edit]

Leibniz contributed a fair amount to the statics and dynamics emerging around him, often disagreeing with Descartes and Newton. He devised a new theory of motion (dynamics) based on kinetic energy and potential energy, which posited space as relative, whereas Newton was thoroughly convinced that space was absolute. An important example of Leibniz's mature physical thinking is his Specimen Dynamicum of 1695.[149][150][151][s]

Until the discovery of subatomic particles and the quantum mechanics governing them, many of Leibniz's speculative ideas about aspects of nature not reducible to statics and dynamics made little sense. For instance, he anticipated Albert Einstein by arguing, against Newton, that space, time and motion are relative, not absolute: "As for my own opinion, I have said more than once, that I hold space to be something merely relative, as time is, that I hold it to be an order of coexistences, as time is an order of successions."[98]

Leibniz held a relational notion of space and time, against Newton's substantivalist views.[152][153][154] According to Newton's substantivalism, space and time are entities in their own right, existing independently of things. Leibniz's relationalism, in contrast, describes space and time as systems of relations that exist between objects. The rise of general relativity and subsequent work in the history of physics has put Leibniz's stance in a more favourable light.

One of Leibniz's projects was to recast Newton's theory as a vortex theory.[155] However, his project went beyond vortex theory, since at its heart there was an attempt to explain one of the most difficult problems in physics, that of the origin of the cohesion of matter.[155]

The principle of sufficient reason has been invoked in recent cosmology, and his identity of indiscernibles in quantum mechanics, a field some even credit him with having anticipated in some sense. In addition to his theories about the nature of reality, Leibniz's contributions to the development of calculus have also had a major impact on physics.

The vis viva

[edit]

Leibniz's vis viva ('living force') is mv2, twice the modern kinetic energy. He realized that the total energy would be conserved in certain mechanical systems, so he considered it an innate motive characteristic of matter.[156][157][158] Here too his thinking gave rise to another regrettable nationalistic dispute. His vis viva was seen as rivaling the conservation of momentum championed by Newton in England and by Descartes and Voltaire in France; hence academics in those countries tended to neglect Leibniz's idea. Leibniz knew of the validity of conservation of momentum. In reality, both energy and momentum are conserved (in closed systems), so both approaches are valid. In Einstein's General Relativity, energy and momentum are not separately conserved. This was thought to be fatal until Emmy Noether showed that taken together, as the four-dimensional energy-momentum tensor, they are conserved.[159]

Other natural science

[edit]

By proposing that the Earth has a molten core, he anticipated modern geology. In embryology, he was a preformationist, but also proposed that organisms are the outcome of a combination of an infinite number of possible microstructures and of their powers. In the life sciences and paleontology, he revealed an amazing transformist intuition, fueled by his study of comparative anatomy and fossils. One of his principal works on this subject, Protogaea, unpublished in his lifetime, has recently been published in English for the first time. He worked out a primal organismic theory.[t] In medicine, he exhorted the physicians of his time – with some results – to ground their theories in detailed comparative observations and verified experiments, and to distinguish firmly scientific and metaphysical points of view.

Psychology

[edit]

Psychology had been a central interest of Leibniz.[161][page needed][162] He appears to be an "underappreciated pioneer of psychology"[163] He wrote on topics which are now regarded as fields of psychology: attention and consciousness, memory, learning (association), motivation (the act of "striving"), emergent individuality, the general dynamics of development (evolutionary psychology). His discussions in the New Essays and Monadology often rely on everyday observations such as the behaviour of a dog or the noise of the sea, and he develops intuitive analogies (the synchronous running of clocks or the balance spring of a clock). He also devised postulates and principles that apply to psychology: the continuum of the unnoticed petites perceptions to the distinct, self-aware apperception, and psychophysical parallelism from the point of view of causality and of purpose: "Souls act according to the laws of final causes, through aspirations, ends and means. Bodies act according to the laws of efficient causes, i.e. the laws of motion. And these two realms, that of efficient causes and that of final causes, harmonize with one another."[164] This idea refers to the mind-body problem, stating that the mind and brain do not act upon each other, but act alongside each other separately but in harmony.[165] Leibniz, however, did not use the term psychologia.[u] Leibniz's epistemological position – against John Locke and English empiricism (sensualism) – was made clear: "Nihil est in intellectu quod non fuerit in sensu, nisi intellectu ipse." – "Nothing is in the intellect that was not first in the senses, except the intellect itself."[168] Principles that are not present in sensory impressions can be recognised in human perception and consciousness: logical inferences, categories of thought, the principle of causality and the principle of purpose (teleology).

Leibniz found his most important interpreter in Wilhelm Wundt, founder of psychology as a discipline. Wundt used the "… nisi intellectu ipse" quotation 1862 on the title page of his Beiträge zur Theorie der Sinneswahrnehmung (Contributions on the Theory of Sensory Perception) and published a detailed and aspiring monograph on Leibniz.[169] Wundt shaped the term apperception, introduced by Leibniz, into an experimental psychologically based apperception psychology that included neuropsychological modelling – an excellent example of how a concept created by a great philosopher could stimulate a psychological research program. One principle in the thinking of Leibniz played a fundamental role: "the principle of equality of separate but corresponding viewpoints." Wundt characterized this style of thought (perspectivism) in a way that also applied for him – viewpoints that "supplement one another, while also being able to appear as opposites that only resolve themselves when considered more deeply."[170][171] Much of Leibniz's work went on to have a great impact on the field of psychology.[172] Leibniz thought that there are many petites perceptions, or small perceptions of which we perceive but of which we are unaware. He believed that by the principle that phenomena found in nature were continuous by default, it was likely that the transition between conscious and unconscious states had intermediary steps.[173] For this to be true, there must also be a portion of the mind of which we are unaware at any given time. His theory regarding consciousness in relation to the principle of continuity can be seen as an early theory regarding the stages of sleep. In this way, Leibniz's theory of perception can be viewed as one of many theories leading up to the idea of the unconscious. Leibniz was a direct influence on Ernst Platner, who is credited with originally coining the term Unbewußtseyn (unconscious).[174] Additionally, the idea of subliminal stimuli can be traced back to his theory of small perceptions.[172] Leibniz's ideas regarding music and tonal perception went on to influence the laboratory studies of Wilhelm Wundt.[175]

Social science

[edit]

In public health, he advocated establishing a medical administrative authority, with powers over epidemiology and veterinary medicine. He worked to set up a coherent medical training program, oriented towards public health and preventive measures. In economic policy, he proposed tax reforms and a national insurance program, and discussed the balance of trade. He even proposed something akin to what much later emerged as game theory. In sociology he laid the ground for communication theory.

Technology

[edit]

In 1906, Garland published a volume of Leibniz's writings bearing on his many practical inventions and engineering work. To date, few of these writings have been translated into English. Nevertheless, it is well understood that Leibniz was a serious inventor, engineer, and applied scientist, with great respect for practical life. Following the motto theoria cum praxi, he urged that theory be combined with practical application, and thus has been claimed as the father of applied science. He designed wind-driven propellers and water pumps, mining machines to extract ore, hydraulic presses, lamps, submarines, clocks, etc. With Denis Papin, he created a steam engine. He even proposed a method for desalinating water. From 1680 to 1685, he struggled to overcome the chronic flooding that afflicted the ducal silver mines in the Harz mountains, but did not succeed.[176]

Computation

[edit]

Leibniz may have been the first computer scientist and information theorist.[v] Early in life, he documented the binary numeral system (base 2), then revisited that system throughout his career.[177] While Leibniz was examining other cultures to compare his metaphysical views, he encountered an ancient Chinese book I Ching. Leibniz interpreted a diagram which showed yin and yang and corresponded it to a zero and one.[178] More information can be found in the Sinophilia section. Leibniz had similarities with Juan Caramuel y Lobkowitz and Thomas Harriot, who independently developed the binary system, as he was familiar with their works on the binary system.[179] Juan Caramuel y Lobkowitz worked extensively on logarithms including logarithms with base 2.[180] Thomas Harriot's manuscripts contained a table of binary numbers and their notation, which demonstrated that any number could be written on a base 2 system.[181] Regardless, Leibniz simplified the binary system and articulated logical properties such as conjunction, disjunction, negation, identity, inclusion, and the empty set.[182] He anticipated Lagrangian interpolation and algorithmic information theory. His calculus ratiocinator anticipated aspects of the universal Turing machine. In 1961, Norbert Wiener suggested that Leibniz should be considered the patron saint of cybernetics.[183] Wiener is quoted with "Indeed, the general idea of a computing machine is nothing but a mechanization of Leibniz's Calculus Ratiocinator."[184]

In 1671, Leibniz began to invent a machine that could execute all four arithmetic operations, gradually improving it over a number of years. This "stepped reckoner" attracted fair attention and was the basis of his election to the Royal Society in 1673. A number of such machines were made during his years in Hanover by a craftsman working under his supervision. They were not an unambiguous success because they did not fully mechanize the carry operation. Couturat reported finding an unpublished note by Leibniz, dated 1674, describing a machine capable of performing some algebraic operations.[185] Leibniz also devised a (now reproduced) cipher machine, recovered by Nicholas Rescher in 2010.[186] In 1693, Leibniz described a design of a machine which could, in theory, integrate differential equations, which he called "integraph".[187]

Leibniz was groping towards hardware and software concepts worked out much later by Charles Babbage and Ada Lovelace. In 1679, while mulling over his binary arithmetic, Leibniz imagined a machine in which binary numbers were represented by marbles, governed by a rudimentary sort of punched cards.[188][189] Modern electronic digital computers replace Leibniz's marbles moving by gravity with shift registers, voltage gradients, and pulses of electrons, but otherwise they run roughly as Leibniz envisioned in 1679.

Librarian

[edit]

Later in Leibniz's career (after the death of von Boyneburg), Leibniz moved to Paris and accepted a position as a librarian in the Hanoverian court of Johann Friedrich, Duke of Brunswick-Luneburg.[190] Leibniz's predecessor, Tobias Fleischer, had already created a cataloging system for the Duke's library but it was a clumsy attempt. At this library, Leibniz focused more on advancing the library than on the cataloging. For instance, within a month of taking the new position, he developed a comprehensive plan to expand the library. He was one of the first to consider developing a core collection for a library and felt "that a library for display and ostentation is a luxury and indeed superfluous, but a well-stocked and organized library is important and useful for all areas of human endeavor and is to be regarded on the same level as schools and churches".[191] Leibniz lacked the funds to develop the library in this manner. After working at this library, by the end of 1690 Leibniz was appointed as privy-councilor and librarian of the Bibliotheca Augusta at Wolfenbüttel. It was an extensive library with at least 25,946 printed volumes.[191] At this library, Leibniz sought to improve the catalog. He was not allowed to make complete changes to the existing closed catalog, but was allowed to improve upon it so he started on that task immediately. He created an alphabetical author catalog and had also created other cataloging methods that were not implemented. While serving as librarian of the ducal libraries in Hanover and Wolfenbüttel, Leibniz effectively became one of the founders of library science. Seemingly, Leibniz paid a good deal of attention to the classification of subject matter, favouring a well-balanced library covering a host of numerous subjects and interests.[192] Leibniz, for example, proposed the following classification system in the Otivm Hanoveranvm Sive Miscellanea (1737):[192][193]

  • Theology
  • Jurisprudence
  • Medicine
  • Intellectual Philosophy
  • Philosophy of the Imagination or Mathematics
  • Philosophy of Sensible Things or Physics
  • Philology or Language
  • Civil History
  • Literary History and Libraries
  • General and Miscellaneous

He also designed a book indexing system in ignorance of the only other such system then extant, that of the Bodleian Library at Oxford University. He also called on publishers to distribute abstracts of all new titles they produced each year, in a standard form that would facilitate indexing. He hoped that this abstracting project would eventually include everything printed from his day back to Gutenberg. Neither proposal met with success at the time, but something like them became standard practice among English language publishers during the 20th century, under the aegis of the Library of Congress and the British Library.[citation needed]

He called for the creation of an empirical database as a way to further all sciences. His characteristica universalis, calculus ratiocinator, and a "community of minds" – intended, among other things, to bring political and religious unity to Europe – can be seen as distant unwitting anticipations of artificial languages (e.g., Esperanto and its rivals), symbolic logic, even the World Wide Web.

Advocate of scientific societies

[edit]

Leibniz emphasized that research was a collaborative endeavour. Hence he warmly advocated the formation of national scientific societies along the lines of the British Royal Society and the French Académie royale des sciences. More specifically, in his correspondence and travels he urged the creation of such societies in Dresden, Saint Petersburg, Vienna, and Berlin. Only one such project came to fruition; in 1700, the Berlin Academy of Sciences was created. Leibniz drew up its first statutes, and served as its first president for the remainder of his life. That academy evolved into the German Academy of Sciences, the publisher of the ongoing Leibniz-Edition of his works.[w]

Law and morality

[edit]

Leibniz's writings on law, ethics, and politics[195][x] were long overlooked by English-speaking scholars, but this has changed.[y]

While Leibniz was no apologist for absolute monarchy like Hobbes, or for tyranny in any form, neither did he echo the political and constitutional views of his contemporary John Locke, views invoked in support of liberalism, in 18th-century America and later elsewhere. The following excerpt from a 1695 letter to Baron J. C. Boyneburg's son Philipp is very revealing of Leibniz's political sentiments:[200]

As for ... the great question of the power of sovereigns and the obedience their peoples owe them, I usually say that it would be good for princes to be persuaded that their people have the right to resist them, and for the people, on the other hand, to be persuaded to obey them passively. I am, however, quite of the opinion of Grotius, that one ought to obey as a rule, the evil of revolution being greater beyond comparison than the evils causing it. Yet I recognize that a prince can go to such excess, and place the well-being of the state in such danger, that the obligation to endure ceases. This is most rare, however, and the theologian who authorizes violence under this pretext should take care against excess; excess being infinitely more dangerous than deficiency.

In 1677, Leibniz called for a European confederation, governed by a council or senate, whose members would represent entire nations and would be free to vote their consciences;[201] this is sometimes considered an anticipation of the European Union. He believed that Europe would adopt a uniform religion. He reiterated these proposals in 1715.

But at the same time, he arrived to propose an interreligious and multicultural project to create a universal system of justice, which required from him a broad interdisciplinary perspective. In order to propose it, he combined linguistics (especially sinology), moral and legal philosophy, management, economics, and politics.[202]

Law

[edit]

Leibniz trained as a legal academic, but under the tutelage of Cartesian-sympathiser Erhard Weigel we already see an attempt to solve legal problems by rationalist mathematical methods; Weigel's influence being most explicit in the Specimen Quaestionum Philosophicarum ex Jure collectarum ('An Essay of Collected Philosophical Problems of Right'). For example, the Disputatio Inauguralis de Casibus Perplexis in Jure ('Inaugural Disputation on Ambiguous Legal Cases')[203] uses early combinatorics to solve some legal disputes, while the 1666 De Arte Combinatoria ('On the Art of Combination')[204] includes simple legal problems by way of illustration.

The use of combinatorial methods to solve legal and moral problems seems, via Athanasius Kircher and Daniel Schwenter to be of Llullist inspiration: Ramón Llull attempted to solve ecumenical disputes through recourse to a combinatorial mode of reasoning he regarded as universal (a mathesis universalis).[205][206]

In the late 1660s the enlightened Prince-Bishop of Mainz Johann Philipp von Schönborn announced a review of the legal system and made available a position to support his current law commissioner. Leibniz left Franconia and made for Mainz before even winning the role. On reaching Frankfurt am Main Leibniz penned "The New Method of Teaching and Learning the Law", by way of application.[207] The text proposed a reform of legal education and is characteristically syncretic, integrating aspects of Thomism, Hobbesianism, Cartesianism and traditional jurisprudence. Leibniz's argument that the function of legal teaching was not to impress rules as one might train a dog, but to aid the student in discovering their own public reason, evidently impressed von Schönborn as he secured the job.

Leibniz's next major attempt to find a universal rational core to law and so found a legal "science of right",[208] came when Leibniz worked in Mainz from 1667–72. Starting initially from Hobbes' mechanistic doctrine of power, Leibniz reverted to logico-combinatorial methods in an attempt to define justice.[209][dubiousdiscuss] As Leibniz's so-called Elementa Juris Naturalis advanced, he built in modal notions of right (possibility) and obligation (necessity) in which we see perhaps the earliest elaboration of his possible worlds doctrine within a deontic frame.[210] While ultimately the Elementa remained unpublished, Leibniz continued to work on his drafts and promote their ideas to correspondents up until his death.

Ecumenism

[edit]

Leibniz devoted considerable intellectual and diplomatic effort to what would now be called an ecumenical endeavor, seeking to reconcile the Roman Catholic and Lutheran churches. In this respect, he followed the example of his early patrons, Baron von Boyneburg and the Duke John Frederick – both cradle Lutherans who converted to Catholicism as adults – who did what they could to encourage the reunion of the two faiths, and who warmly welcomed such endeavors by others. (The House of Brunswick remained Lutheran, because the Duke's children did not follow their father.) These efforts included corresponding with French bishop Jacques-Bénigne Bossuet, and involved Leibniz in some theological controversy. He evidently thought that the thoroughgoing application of reason would suffice to heal the breach caused by the Reformation.

Philology

[edit]

Leibniz the philologist was an avid student of languages, eagerly latching on to any information about vocabulary and grammar that came his way. In 1710, he applied ideas of gradualism and uniformitarianism to linguistics in a short essay.[211] He refuted the belief, widely held by Christian scholars of the time, that Hebrew was the primeval language of the human race. At the same time, he rejected the idea of unrelated language groups and considered them all to have a common source.[212] He also refuted the argument, advanced by Swedish scholars in his day, that a form of proto-Swedish was the ancestor of the Germanic languages. He puzzled over the origins of the Slavic languages and was fascinated by classical Chinese. Leibniz was also an expert in the Sanskrit language.[213]

He published the princeps editio ('first modern edition') of the late medieval Chronicon Holtzatiae, a Latin chronicle of the County of Holstein.

Sinophilia

[edit]
A diagram of I Ching hexagrams sent to Leibniz from Joachim Bouvet. The Arabic numerals were added by Leibniz.[214]

Leibniz was perhaps the first major European intellectual to take a close interest in Chinese civilization, which he knew by corresponding with, and reading other works by, European Christian missionaries posted in China. He apparently read Confucius Sinarum Philosophus in the first year of its publication.[215] He came to the conclusion that Europeans could learn much from the Confucian ethical tradition. He mulled over the possibility that the Chinese characters were an unwitting form of his universal characteristic. He noted how the I Ching hexagrams correspond to the binary numbers from 000000 to 111111, and concluded that this mapping was evidence of major Chinese accomplishments in the sort of philosophical mathematics he admired.[z] Leibniz communicated his ideas of the binary system representing Christianity to the Emperor of China, hoping it would convert him.[213] Leibniz was one of the western philosophers of the time who attempted to accommodate Confucian ideas to prevailing European beliefs.[217]

Leibniz's attraction to Chinese philosophy originates from his perception that Chinese philosophy was similar to his own.[215] The historian E.R. Hughes suggests that Leibniz's ideas of "simple substance" and "pre-established harmony" were directly influenced by Confucianism, pointing to the fact that they were conceived during the period when he was reading Confucius Sinarum Philosophus.[215]

Polymath

[edit]

While making his grand tour of European archives to research the Brunswick family history that he never completed, Leibniz stopped in Vienna between May 1688 and February 1689, where he did much legal and diplomatic work for the Brunswicks. He visited mines, talked with mine engineers, and tried to negotiate export contracts for lead from the ducal mines in the Harz mountains. His proposal that the streets of Vienna be lit with lamps burning rapeseed oil was implemented. During a formal audience with the Austrian Emperor and in subsequent memoranda, he advocated reorganizing the Austrian economy, reforming the coinage of much of central Europe, negotiating a Concordat between the Habsburgs and the Vatican, and creating an imperial research library, official archive, and public insurance fund. He wrote and published an important paper on mechanics.

Posthumous reputation

[edit]
Leibnizstraße (lit.'Leibniz Street') in Berlin

When Leibniz died, his reputation was in decline. He was remembered for only one book, Théodicée, whose supposed central argument Voltaire lampooned in his popular book Candide, which concludes with the character Candide saying, "non liquet" ('it is not clear'), a term that was applied during the Roman Republic to a legal verdict of 'not proven'. Voltaire's depiction of Leibniz's ideas was so influential that many believed it to be an accurate description. Thus Voltaire and his Candide bear some of the blame for the lingering failure to appreciate and understand Leibniz's ideas. Leibniz had an ardent disciple, Christian Wolff, whose dogmatic and facile outlook did Leibniz's reputation much harm. Leibniz also influenced David Hume, who read his Théodicée and used some of his ideas.[218] In any event, philosophical fashion was moving away from the rationalism and system building of the 17th century, of which Leibniz had been such an ardent proponent. His work on law, diplomacy, and history was seen as of ephemeral interest. The vastness and richness of his correspondence went unrecognized.

Leibniz's reputation began to recover with the 1765 publication of the Nouveaux Essais. In 1768, Louis Dutens edited the first multi-volume edition of Leibniz's writings, followed in the 19th century by a number of editions, including those edited by Erdmann, Foucher de Careil, Gerhardt, Gerland, Klopp, and Mollat. Publication of Leibniz's correspondence with notables such as Antoine Arnauld, Samuel Clarke, Sophia of Hanover, and her daughter Sophia Charlotte of Hanover, began.

In 1900, Bertrand Russell published a critical study of Leibniz's metaphysics.[118] Shortly thereafter, Louis Couturat published an important study of Leibniz, and edited a volume of Leibniz's heretofore unpublished writings, mainly on logic. They made Leibniz somewhat respectable among 20th-century analytical and linguistic philosophers in the English-speaking world (Leibniz had already been of great influence to many Germans such as Bernhard Riemann). For example, Leibniz's phrase salva veritate, meaning 'interchangeability without loss of or compromising the truth', recurs in Willard Quine's writings. Nevertheless, the secondary literature on Leibniz did not really blossom until after World War II. This is especially true of English speaking countries; in Gregory Brown's bibliography fewer than 30 of the English language entries were published before 1946. American Leibniz studies owe much to Leroy Loemker (1900–1985) through his translations and his interpretive essays in LeClerc (1973). Leibniz's philosophy was also highly regarded by Gilles Deleuze,[219] who in 1988 published The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque.

Nicholas Jolley has surmised that Leibniz's reputation as a philosopher is now perhaps higher than at any time since he was alive.[220] Analytic and contemporary philosophy continue to invoke his notions of identity, individuation, and possible worlds. Work in the history of 17th- and 18th-century ideas has revealed more clearly the 17th-century "Intellectual Revolution" that preceded the better-known Industrial and commercial revolutions of the 18th and 19th centuries.

In Germany, various important institutions were named after Leibniz. In Hanover in particular, he is the namesake for some of the most important institutions in the town:

  • Leibniz University Hannover
  • Leibniz-Akademie, an institution for academic and non-academic training and further education in the business sector
  • Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek – Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek, one of the largest regional and academic libraries in Germany and, alongside the Oldenburg State Library and the Herzog August Library in Wolfenbüttel, one of the three state libraries in Lower Saxony
  • Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, a society for the cultivation and dissemination of Leibniz's teachings

Outside of Hanover:

  • Leibniz Association, Berlin
  • Leibniz Scientific Society (Leibniz-Sozietät der Wissenschaften), an association of scientists founded in Berlin in 1993 with the legal form of a registered association, and which continues the activities of the Akademie der Wissenschaften der DDR ('Academy of Sciences of the GDR') with personnel continuity
  • Leibniz Kolleg of the Tübingen University, central propaedeutic institution of the university, which aims to enable high school graduates to make a well-founded study decision through a ten-month, comprehensive general course of study and at the same time to introduce them to academic work
  • Leibniz Supercomputing Centre in Garching at Munich
  • more than 20 schools all over Germany

Awards:

In 1985, the German government created the Leibniz Prize, offering an annual award of, as of 2025, €2.5 million each for up to 10 recipients.[221] It was the world's largest prize for scientific achievement prior to the Fundamental Physics Prize.[citation needed]

The collection of manuscript papers of Leibniz at the Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz Bibliothek – Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek was inscribed on UNESCO's Memory of the World Register in 2007.[222]

Cultural references

[edit]

Leibniz still receives popular attention. The Google Doodle for 1 July 2018 celebrated Leibniz's 372nd birthday.[223][224][225] Using a quill, his hand is shown writing Google in binary ASCII code.

One of the earliest popular but indirect expositions of Leibniz was Voltaire's satire Candide, published in 1759. Leibniz was lampooned as Professor Pangloss, described as "the greatest philosopher of the Holy Roman Empire".[This quote needs a citation]

Leibniz also appears as one of the main historical figures in Neal Stephenson's series of novels The Baroque Cycle. Stephenson credits readings and discussions concerning Leibniz for inspiring him to write the series.[226]

Leibniz also stars in Adam Ehrlich Sachs's novel "The Organs of Sense".[citation needed]

The German biscuit Choco Leibniz is named after Leibniz. Its manufacturer Bahlsen is based in Hanover, where Leibniz lived for four decades until his death.

Writings and publication

[edit]
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz, c. 1710

Leibniz wrote mainly in three languages: scholastic Latin, French and German. During his lifetime, he published many pamphlets and scholarly articles, but only two philosophical books: De Arte Combinatoria and Théodicée. (He published numerous pamphlets, often anonymous, on behalf of the House of Brunswick-Lüneburg, most notably De jure suprematum, 'On the right of Supremacy', a major consideration of the nature of sovereignty.) One substantial book appeared posthumously, his Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain ('New Essays on Human Understanding'), which Leibniz had withheld from publication after the death of John Locke. Only in 1895, when Bodemann completed his catalogue of Leibniz's manuscripts and correspondence, did the enormous extent of Leibniz's Nachlass ('literary estate') become clear: about 15,000 letters to more than 1000 recipients, and more than 40,000 other items. Moreover, quite a few of these letters are of essay length. Much of his vast correspondence, especially the letters dated after 1700, remains unpublished, and much of what is published has appeared only in recent decades. The more than 67,000 records of the working catalogue of the Leibniz-Edition[227] cover almost all of his known writings and the letters from him and to him. The amount, variety, and disorder of Leibniz's writings are a predictable result of a situation he described in a letter as follows:[228]

I cannot tell you how extraordinarily distracted and spread out I am. I am trying to find various things in the archives; I look at old papers and hunt up unpublished documents. From these I hope to shed some light on the history of the [House of] Brunswick. I receive and answer a huge number of letters. At the same time, I have so many mathematical results, philosophical thoughts, and other literary innovations that should not be allowed to vanish that I often do not know where to begin.

The extant parts of the Leibniz-Edition[229] of Leibniz's writings are organized as follows:

  • Series 1. Political, Historical, and General Correspondence. 25 volumes, 1666–1706.
  • Series 2. Philosophical Correspondence. 3 volumes, 1663–1700.
  • Series 3. Mathematical, Scientific, and Technical Correspondence. 8 volumes, 1672–1698.
  • Series 4. Political Writings. 9 volumes, 1667–1702.
  • Series 5. Historical and Linguistic Writings. In preparation.
  • Series 6. Philosophical Writings. 7 volumes, 1663–1690, and Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain.
  • Series 7. Mathematical Writings. 6 volumes, 1672–1676.
  • Series 8. Scientific, Medical, and Technical Writings. 1 volume, 1668–1676.

The systematic cataloguing of all of Leibniz's Nachlass began in 1901. This effort was hampered by World War I and World War II and then by decades of German division into East Germany and West Germany, separating scholars and scattering portions of his literary estates. The ambitious project has had to deal with writings in seven languages, contained in some 200,000 written and printed pages. In 1985 it was reorganized and included in a joint program of German federal and state (Länder) academies. Since then the branches in Potsdam, Münster, Hanover and Berlin have jointly published 57 volumes of the Leibniz-Edition, with an average of 870 pages, and prepared index and concordance works.

Selected works

[edit]

The year given is usually that in which the work was completed, not of its eventual publication.

  • 1666 (publ. 1690): De Arte Combinatoria ('On the Art of Combination'); partially translated in Loemker (1969)[230] and Parkinson (1966)
  • 1667: Nova Methodus Discendae Docendaeque Iurisprudentiae ('A New Method for Learning and Teaching Jurisprudence')
  • 1667: "Dialogus de connexione inter res et verba" ('A dialogue about the connection between things and Words')
  • 1671: Hypothesis Physica Nova ('New Physical Hypothesis')[231]
  • 1673: Confessio philosophi ('A Philosopher's Creed')[232][233]
  • Oct. 1684: "Meditationes de cognitione, veritate et ideis" ('Meditations on Knowledge, Truth, and Ideas')
  • Nov. 1684: "Nova methodus pro maximis et minimis" ('New method for maximums and minimums')[234]
  • 1686: Discours de métaphysique[235][236][237][238][239]
  • 1686: Generales inquisitiones de analysi notionum et veritatum ('General Inquiries About the Analysis of Concepts and of Truths')
  • 1694: "De primae philosophiae Emendatione, et de Notione Substantiae" ('On the Correction of First Philosophy and the Notion of Substance')
  • 1695: Système nouveau de la nature et de la communication des substances ('New System of Nature')
  • 1700: Accessiones historicae[240]
  • 1703: "Explication de l'Arithmétique Binaire" ('Explanation of Binary Arithmetic')[241]
  • 1704 (publ. 1765): Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain[242][243]
  • 1707–1710: Scriptores rerum Brunsvicensium[240] (3 volumes)
  • 1710: Théodicée[244][245][246]
  • 1714: "Principes de la nature et de la Grâce fondés en raison"
  • 1714: Monadologie[247][248][249][250][251][252][253]

Posthumous works

[edit]
Commercium philosophicum et mathematicum (1745), a collection of letters between Leibnitz and Johann Bernoulli

Collections

[edit]

Six important collections of English translations are Wiener (1951), Parkinson (1966), Loemker (1969), Ariew & Garber (1989), Woolhouse & Francks (1998), and Strickland (2006).

The historical-critical scholarly editing of the collected papers of Leibniz, begun in 1901 and conducted by various editorial projects during that time, remains ongoing as of 2025, and is conducted by the editorial project Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe ('Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz: Complete Writings and Letters'), the Leibniz-Edition ('Leibniz edition') colloqually.[229]

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1 July 1646 – 14 November 1716) was a German renowned for foundational contributions across , , logic, physics, , and . Born in to a of scholars, he pursued studies in and before developing innovative mechanical calculators and early concepts, including a stepped mechanism for arithmetic operations. Leibniz independently formulated the principles of differential and in the 1670s, introducing notation such as dx/dy and the integral sign that remains standard, though his work sparked a bitter priority dispute with , who developed similar methods concurrently; historical analysis confirms their inventions were parallel without direct plagiarism./02:_Calculus_in_the_17th_and_18th_Centuries/2.01:_Newton_and_Leibniz_Get_Started) In metaphysics, he advanced the concept of monads—indivisible, windowless substances as the basic constituents of reality—positing a pre-established harmony ordained by God to synchronize their perceptions without causal interaction. Leibniz also pioneered binary arithmetic, envisioning it as a universal computational language reflective of creation from nothing (1 and 0), and corresponded extensively on topics from to European while serving as a and .

Early Life and Education

Birth and Family Background

Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz was born on 1 July 1646 in , , , during the final phases of the , which had severely disrupted the region. He was baptized into the Lutheran Church three days later, reflecting the family's devout Protestant faith. His father, (1597–1652), served as professor of moral at the University of Leipzig, where he also acted as vice chairman of the philosophy faculty, a , , and registrar; Friedrich had earned his in from the university in 1620 and maintained a scholarly household with an extensive that young accessed after his father's . Friedrich's career emphasized ethical and classical studies, influencing the intellectual environment in which Leibniz grew up. Leibniz's mother, Catharina Schmuck (1621–1664), was Friedrich's third wife and the daughter of Wilhelm Schmuck, a prominent lawyer; she managed the household following Friedrich's death in 1652, when Leibniz was six, fostering a pious Lutheran upbringing amid the family's scholarly traditions. The couple had several children, though Leibniz was their only child together, with half-siblings from Friedrich's prior marriages contributing to a blended dynamic centered on and moral philosophy. This early exposure to paternal resources and maternal guidance laid the foundation for Leibniz's precocious self- in Latin, Greek, and .

Studies in Leipzig, Altdorf, and Jena

Leibniz enrolled at the University of in 1661 at the age of 14 or 15, pursuing studies in , , and under professors such as in and Bartholomäus Leonhard Schmid in . His early academic work there included engagement with scholastic and , influenced by his self-directed reading of classical texts following his father's death in 1652. 's curriculum emphasized Aristotelian logic and , which Leibniz supplemented with independent explorations into metaphysics and . In the summer of 1663, Leibniz briefly attended the , studying and moral philosophy under Erhard Weigel, a proponent of applied logic and cryptographic methods. This short interlude, lasting one term, exposed him to Weigel's innovative approaches to reconciling with jurisprudence, foreshadowing Leibniz's later interests in universal symbolism. By October 1663, he returned to to advance toward a doctorate in , completing required but facing barriers to formal graduation due to university age restrictions or procedural issues. Unable to obtain his degree in , Leibniz transferred to the of Altdorf near in 1666, where he rapidly prepared and defended his doctoral thesis Disputatio de casibus perplexis in iure (Discussion of Perplexing Cases in Law) on , earning both the licentiate and doctorate in law. The thesis addressed complex legal conditions and obligations, demonstrating his analytical rigor in applying logical principles to . Concurrently, in early 1666, he published (Dissertation on the Art of Combinations), expanding on ideas from his and periods to propose a for reasoning based on combinatorial permutations of notions. This work, dedicated to the Society of Jesus, aimed to systematize knowledge through calculable symbols, marking an early step toward his mature philosophical system. Following his enrollment at the University of Leipzig in 1661, where he initially focused on philosophy, Leibniz increasingly directed his studies toward , engaging with , principles, and jurisprudential methodology. By 1664, he had begun composing early legal treatises, including analyses of and demonstration, which reflected his ambition to apply logical and combinatorial methods to resolve juridical complexities. These efforts culminated in his transfer to the University of Altdorf, where he defended his dissertation on the conditions of punishment in cases of doubt (De conditionibus), earning his doctorate in on , 1666. Upon receiving his degree, Leibniz declined a professorship at Altdorf to pursue practical and advisory roles in . He briefly served as salaried secretary to a Nuremberg society investigating and , a position that afforded modest financial support while allowing time for writing. During this interval, in 1667, he published Nova Methodus Discendae Docendaeque Jurisprudentiae, dedicating it to the and advocating a systematic, principle-based reform of : law should be organized encyclopedically, reduced to axiomatic foundations akin to , and taught through dialectical analysis of controversies drawn from Roman sources like the Digest. This work emphasized jus naturale as the core of , with deriving validity from rational harmony rather than mere custom or authority. The Nova Methodus attracted notice from influential figures, including Baron Johann Christian von Boineburg, chief minister to Elector Johann Philipp von Schönborn of . By late 1667, Leibniz relocated to the Frankfurt-Mainz region, leveraging Boineburg's patronage to propose comprehensive legal reforms, such as streamlining electoral statutes through logical deduction from principles. His efforts bore fruit in 1669, when he was appointed assessor—a judicial role involving case review and opinion drafting—in the Electorate's of appeal, an unusual honor for a 23-year-old Lutheran in a Catholic . That same year, he issued Specimina Juris, a compilation of three essays: Specimen Difficultatis in Jure (on perplexing legal cases), Specimen Certitudinis sive Demonstrationum in Jure Exhibitum (demonstrating mathematical rigor in law), and Specimen Quaestionum Philosophicarum ex Jure Collectarum (philosophical queries from legal texts). These pieces illustrated his method of dissolving apparent contradictions via precise definitions and probabilistic reasoning, presaging his later metaphysical concerns with and necessity. Though his assessorship marked the onset of formal practice, Leibniz's early years emphasized theoretical innovation over routine litigation; he contributed opinions on electoral disputes and code revisions but prioritized universal principles to mitigate interpretive ambiguity in civil and canon law. This phase laid groundwork for his view of justice as charitable maximization of the common good, distinct from strict equity, influencing subsequent diplomatic and philosophical endeavors.

Service to the Archbishop of Mainz (1669–1676)

In November 1667, Leibniz entered the service of Johann Christian von Boineburg, the privy councilor and chief minister to Johann Philipp von Schönborn, the Elector-Archbishop of , initially as Boineburg's personal secretary, assistant, librarian, and legal advisor based in , with duties extending to the Mainz court. Through Boineburg's , Leibniz gained access to Schönborn, an enlightened ruler interested in legal reform, , and unity, and was tasked with contributing to the modernization of the Electorate's legal code by improving aspects of Roman civil law to align with contemporary needs. By 1669, Leibniz had been appointed assessor in the Court of Appeal (Hofgericht) in , where he provided legal counsel on general jurisdictional matters and anonymous position papers addressing imperial legal challenges. His work extended to broader initiatives, including proposals for a unified legal framework across the to resolve inconsistencies in civil law application among principalities. Leibniz also supported Schönborn's and Boineburg's efforts toward Protestant-Catholic reconciliation, drafting theological monographs that explored common doctrinal ground while maintaining Lutheran principles, reflecting the court's diplomatic orientation amid religious tensions. Complementing his legal duties, Leibniz pursued scientific inquiries suited to Schönborn's patronage of ; in 1671, he published Hypothesis Physica Nova, a treatise positing motion and activity as derived from an immaterial or active force pervading matter, drawing on corpuscular mechanics while critiquing purely mechanistic accounts like those of Descartes. This work aligned with the court's intellectual climate, as Schönborn hosted discussions on chemistry and physics, though Leibniz's primary role remained advisory on policy and law. Early diplomatic activities included mediating tensions between under and the Habsburg Emperor Leopold I, with Leibniz authoring memoranda advocating balanced power arrangements to avert invasion of German territories. Boineburg's death in late 1672 and Schönborn's in February 1673 disrupted Leibniz's position, reducing his salary to a modest , yet he retained ties to the court, continuing advisory functions until formal service concluded around 1676 amid shifting electoral politics.

Diplomatic Mission to (1672–1676)

In early 1672, Leibniz was dispatched to by Johann Christian von Boineburg, chief minister to Elector Johann Philipp von Schönborn of , to negotiate with French authorities amid rising tensions from Louis XIV's expansionist policies during the . The mission aimed to avert French incursions into German territories, particularly along the , by proposing a grand strategic diversion that would redirect French military ambitions away from . Leibniz departed in late February or early March, arriving in by the end of March 1672, equipped with credentials and his detailed "Consilium Aegyptiacum" plan drafted in late 1671. The core of Leibniz's diplomatic proposal, the Egyptian Plan, envisioned France leading a pan-European coalition to conquer as a base for reclaiming the from Ottoman control, framing it as a religious crusade that would glorify , secure French trade routes via the , and neutralize the Turkish threat while sparing internal conflict. This scheme drew on historical precedents like Napoleon's later Egyptian campaign but emphasized ecumenical unity among Christian powers, including potential with Protestant states, to foster lasting peace; Leibniz argued it aligned French interests with the "common good of " by providing overseas gains superior to conquests. He presented the plan to key figures, including Antoine Colbert, director of the French Royal Library, and sought audiences with foreign minister and other courtiers, leveraging his linguistic skills and erudition to advocate for the Elector of Mainz's vision of imperial security. Despite initial discussions, the proposal encountered ; French strategists prioritized immediate continental gains, and by April 1672, invaded the , rendering the diplomatic overture moot. Throughout his stay, Leibniz balanced formal with informal networking, residing in until October 1676 while pursuing secondary objectives such as legal and scientific exchanges. He corresponded with Boineburg on ongoing negotiations, including attempts to clarify Habsburg-French boundaries and promote Mainz's interests in ecclesiastical disputes, but these efforts yielded no substantive agreements amid France's escalating Dutch War. Boineburg's death in December 1672 and Schönborn's in February 1673 left Leibniz without strong patronage, yet he delayed return to , citing the need to complete diplomatic reports and explore opportunities, during which he audited mathematical lectures and engaged with savants like —though these intellectual pursuits, while fruitful for his later work, were incidental to the mission's political mandate. The mission ultimately failed to alter French policy or secure alliances, highlighting the limits of intellectual diplomacy against ; Leibniz's plan, though visionary in its causal linkage of overseas expansion to European stability, presupposed a rational convergence of interests that Louis XIV's absolutism disregarded. By 1676, with no further prospects in and overtures from the Duke of , Leibniz departed for , marking the end of his brief but formative diplomatic phase under .

Hanover Period and Later Career (1676–1716)

Appointment to the House of Hanover

In 1676, following the death of his primary patrons in and amid financial uncertainty after his extended in , Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz accepted an offer of employment from Johann Friedrich, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, ruler of the (later known as ). The duke, with whom Leibniz had corresponded since at least 1669 regarding intellectual and practical matters such as mining improvements, appointed him as privy councilor and of the ducal collections in . This position provided Leibniz with a stable salary of 400 thalers annually, along with responsibilities for managing the library and advising on administrative, scientific, and diplomatic affairs. Leibniz departed Paris in October 1676 but delayed his full relocation by undertaking a brief trip to to visit the Royal Society and observe scientific instruments, including those related to and . He arrived in by December 1676, marking the beginning of his 40-year association with the House of Brunswick-Lüneburg. The appointment reflected Johann Friedrich's appreciation for Leibniz's versatile talents, as the duke—a Calvinist ruler with interests in , , and technology—sought a advisor capable of advancing the court's intellectual prestige and practical projects, such as for regional mines. Though initially focused on archival and advisory duties, Leibniz quickly proposed ambitious initiatives to the duke, including a systematic history of the Guelph dynasty and technical reforms, underscoring the strategic nature of his recruitment beyond mere librarianship. This role in Hanover allowed Leibniz greater autonomy for his philosophical and mathematical pursuits compared to his prior ecclesiastical service, though it tethered him to court obligations that sometimes conflicted with his scholarly ambitions.

Administrative and Scientific Roles

Upon arriving in in late 1676, Leibniz was appointed librarian and court councillor to Duke Friedrich of Brunswick-Lünenburg, roles that involved managing the ducal library's collections and providing legal and advisory counsel. He continued in these capacities under subsequent rulers, including Duke Ernst August from 1679 onward, and was elevated to privy councillor of justice in 1696 by Ernst August, a position he retained until his death while serving Elector Georg Ludwig from 1698. In 1691, he also became director of the ducal library in , where he oversaw cataloging and expansion efforts. As official historian, Leibniz was commissioned in the 1680s by Ernst August to compile a comprehensive history of the House of Brunswick tracing back to , entailing extensive archival research; he traveled from November 1687 to June 1690 across , , and , amassing documents that resulted in nine published volumes of source materials, though the full narrative remained unfinished at his death. Administratively, he advised on political and diplomatic matters, leveraging his network of correspondents to support Hanoverian interests, including genealogical claims that bolstered the family's electoral aspirations. Leibniz's scientific roles intertwined with his administrative duties, particularly in applied ; from 1678 to 1679, he proposed and pursued a project to drain flooded silver mines in the Mountains using wind- and water-powered pumps, continuing technical oversight until 1686 despite ultimate failure due to logistical challenges. He advocated for institutional advancements in science, drafting proposals for German academies to foster in , , and experimentation as early as his tenure's outset, and in 1700 co-founded the Brandenburg Society of Sciences in , serving as its inaugural president to promote and practical innovations. These efforts reflected his vision of integrating theoretical inquiry with state-supported utility, though often constrained by court priorities.

Final Years and Health Decline

In the years leading up to his death, Leibniz pursued diplomatic and intellectual opportunities amid growing professional isolation. In 1714, he traveled to to congratulate Emperor Charles VI on his , while advocating for reforms such as the establishment of a learned and seeking greater influence, though these efforts yielded limited success. He continued extensive correspondence on philosophical, mathematical, and political matters, including a final push in 1716 to advise Tsar on institutional reforms during their meeting in , where Leibniz proposed models for a inspired by European precedents. These ambitions, however, were overshadowed by unresolved disputes, notably the 1711 Royal Society verdict favoring Newton in the calculus priority controversy, which diminished Leibniz's standing in British scientific circles. Leibniz's health, long compromised by and recurrent attacks of —a form of characterized by deposits causing severe —deteriorated sharply in his later years. By early 1716, mobility issues confined much of his activity to correspondence from , where he resided as court counselor to the House of Brunswick-Lüneburg. A particularly acute episode in June 1716 left him , exacerbating respiratory complications and preventing further travel or public engagements. Despite these afflictions, he persisted in writing, completing works on metaphysics and history until his final months.

Personal Life and Character

Relationships and Correspondences

Leibniz maintained an extensive network of correspondences, estimated at over 15,000 letters, spanning intellectual, diplomatic, and personal matters with figures across . His closest personal relationships were with the women of the House of Hanover, particularly Sophie of Hanover and her daughter Sophie Charlotte, Queen of . Leibniz served as a philosophical interlocutor to both, engaging in discussions on the nature of the mind, innate knowledge, and the operation of substances. The correspondence with Sophie Charlotte, initiated during her visits and invitations to around 1700, addressed topics like the immateriality of the soul and critiques of , with Leibniz clarifying his views in accessible terms. Similarly, his exchanges with Sophie from the 1690s onward covered , , and metaphysics, reflecting a bond built over decades of service to the Hanoverian court. Intellectually, Leibniz's correspondence with from 1679 to 1695 focused on and physics, including quadrature methods and infinite series, during which Huygens mentored him in advanced continental during his Paris period. With in the 1680s and 1690s, Leibniz debated the viability of his metaphysical system, particularly individual substances and predication across possible worlds, leading Arnauld to question the coherence of trans-world identity. Later, the 1715–1716 exchange with , prompted by Leibniz's criticisms of Newtonian conveyed through Princess Caroline of Wales, encompassed five rounds of letters debating God's role in the universe, the nature of as relational versus absolute, and versus necessity. Leibniz met briefly in 1676 and remained critical of his pantheistic , viewing it as incompatible with divine , though he engaged indirectly through critiques in later works. These interactions underscored Leibniz's role as a bridge between rationalist traditions while defending his optimistic and .

Religious Beliefs and Daily Habits

Leibniz remained a devout Lutheran throughout his life, rejecting offers such as the Vatican librarianship in 1677 that would have required conversion to Catholicism. He viewed as rationally defensible, insisting that must align with reason, which he considered a divine gift capable of demonstrating God's existence and key doctrines like the immortality of the soul. In works such as the (1710), he argued against by upholding traditional Christian tenets—including divine , , and benevolence—within a framework where exists compatibly due to metaphysical necessity and . His theological outlook emphasized , driven by a desire for Christian reunion; from the 1690s onward, he corresponded with Catholic figures like Bossuet and engaged in efforts to bridge Lutheran and Reformed divides, proposing as a basis for doctrinal compromise without compromising core Protestant principles. Leibniz critiqued excessive in other traditions as detracting from God's sole honor, aligning with Lutheran while favoring syncretic elements that prioritized scriptural fundamentals over ritual disputes. Piety, for him, culminated in loving God above all through contemplation of divine perfection and ethical imitation, fostering spiritual joy via intellectual assent to truth and moral progress. Leibniz's daily habits reflected his intellectual discipline and sedentary scholarly life, marked by extensive correspondence—over 20,000 letters preserved—and late-night work sessions fueled by high energy, often leading to irritability from . Administrative duties in occupied his days, interspersed with reading, writing, and travel for and , which he deemed essential exercise amid prolonged desk work. This routine embodied his , viewing continuous pursuit of knowledge as aligned with divine order and human perfection.

Death and Burial

Leibniz succumbed to complications from longstanding on November 14, 1716, at approximately 10:00 p.m. in his residence in , after months of being and increasingly frail. His final illness exacerbated chronic podagra, which had progressively worsened despite rudimentary medical interventions available at the time, including and remedies that offered little relief. In the preceding years, Leibniz's position at the Hanoverian court had diminished following Elector George Louis's ascension as King George I of in 1714; the court departed for , instructing Leibniz to remain in Hanover to finalize a commissioned of the House of Brunswick-Lüneburg, which contributed to his sense of isolation, though contemporary accounts indicate the neglect was less absolute than later narratives suggest. He received no funeral honors commensurate with his stature, reflecting the court's waning regard for his administrative and intellectual contributions amid political shifts. Leibniz's remains were interred on December 14, 1716 (New Style), in an unmarked grave adjacent to the altar in the Neustädter Hof- und Stadtkirche St. Johannis in , without ceremony or , as per Lutheran customs for non-nobles and his lack of immediate family or high court favor. The site's precise location was forgotten over time, leading to 18th- and 19th-century exhumations and disputes over identification, including analysis of a purported attributed to him, but the church remains the verified burial place based on historical records. A modest monument was eventually erected in 1764, though his legacy's recognition grew posthumously through scholarly efforts rather than contemporary commemoration.

Philosophical Foundations

Principle of Sufficient Reason and Identity of Indiscernibles

Leibniz articulated the (PSR) as a fundamental axiom requiring that every true proposition or existing fact possess an explanation for its obtaining rather than otherwise. In his (§32, 1714), he formulated it explicitly: "No fact can hold or be real, and no proposition can be true, unless there is a sufficient reason why it is so and not otherwise." This principle distinguishes between necessary truths, grounded in the principle of contradiction, and contingent truths, which demand extrinsic reasons forming an infinite explanatory series ultimately resolved by divine intellect or necessity. Leibniz applied the PSR to reject brute contingencies, insisting that even God's choices, such as creating this world over others, stem from rational sufficiency rather than arbitrary will. The Principle of the Identity of Indiscernibles (PII) asserts that two entities cannot differ solely in number (solo numero) but must possess at least one distinguishing ; if all properties coincide, the entities are identical. Leibniz derived the PII directly from the PSR in works like "Primary Truths" (ca. 1689), arguing that indiscernible duplicates would lack a sufficient reason for their spatial or temporal differentiation—e.g., why one occupies position A and the other B, absent any qualitative basis for divine placement. He extended this to critique absolute space and time, as posited by Newton, contending that relational differences alone suffice for individuation without invoking ungrounded uniformity. Together, the PSR and PII underpin Leibniz's rationalist metaphysics, ensuring no reality escapes explanatory necessity and prohibiting mere numerical multiplicity in substances. These axioms preclude atoms or void space, as uniform particles would violate distinguishability, and support his monadic ontology where each simple substance reflects the universe uniquely. Leibniz viewed them as self-evident from reason, though later critics like Russell challenged the PII with symmetrical scenarios lacking intuitive violation.

Principle of Continuity and Possible Worlds

Leibniz articulated the principle of continuity, often summarized as natura non facit saltus ("nature makes no leaps"), asserting that all natural changes and transitions occur by infinitesimal degrees rather than abrupt jumps. This principle, which he regarded as a foundational insight akin to his other logical axioms, implies the presence of intermediate states in any progression, whether in time, space, qualities, motion, or extension. Leibniz first emphasized it in correspondence, such as drafts to Antoine Arnauld around 1686–1690, and elaborated in works like the Specimen Dynamicum (1695), where it underpins his rejection of instantaneous changes in physical interactions. In application, critiqued atomistic and Cartesian mechanics by denying perfectly rigid bodies or sudden collisions, as these would introduce discontinuities incompatible with continuous force and motion. Leibniz extended it to perceptual and cognitive realms, arguing in the New Essays on Human Understanding (composed 1703–1705, published 1765) that even illusions or dreams maintain degrees of clarity, with no absolute void between and . This supported his , where quantities vary continuously, avoiding the paradoxes of discrete limits, and reinforced a metaphysics of without ultimate atoms. Leibniz's doctrine of possible worlds posits an infinite array of coherent, complete conceptual possibilities, from which selects and actualizes the optimal one as the actual . Developed in texts like the Discourse on Metaphysics (1686) and systematized in the Essays on (1710), it holds that each world comprises compossible monads—simple substances whose individual notions encompass all predicates—maximizing variety reconciled with order, or metaphysical perfection. 's choice, guided by infinite wisdom, favors the world with the greatest excess of reality over possibility, ensuring no superior alternative exists, though it permits as a necessary contrast for greater goods. The principles interconnect in Leibniz's system: continuity governs the internal structure of the actual , enforcing gradual actualization of monadic perceptions in pre-established harmony, while possible worlds explain its selection as the continuum of maximal compatibility among discrete conceptual essences. This framework counters by affirming contingency—worlds differ in degrees of —yet upholds within the chosen sequence, where continuity precludes arbitrary leaps in divine or . Critics, including contemporaries like Bayle, challenged the "best" designation amid evident , but Leibniz maintained empirical imperfections as illusions from finite viewpoints, verifiable through rational maximization of compatible goods.

Critique of Occasionalism and Cartesianism

Leibniz critiqued Cartesianism for its mechanistic physics, particularly the conservation of the "quantity of motion" defined as mass times velocity (mv), which he demonstrated leads to violations of the equality of cause and effect. In his Brief Demonstration of 1686, Leibniz illustrated this with falling bodies: a 4-pound object falling 1 meter exerts equivalent force to a 1-pound object falling 4 meters, preserving vis viva (mv²) rather than mv, exposing Cartesian laws as inadequate for elastic collisions and continuity. He further rejected Descartes' view of matter as mere extension, arguing it renders bodies passive and indifferent to motion, necessitating perpetual divine interventions to explain changes, as extension alone cannot account for active force or directional tendencies. In the metaphysical domain, Leibniz opposed the Cartesian doctrine of physical influx, under which mind and body causally interact directly, such as through the , deeming it unintelligible given the indivisible, windowless nature of substances that precludes influx or efflux of properties. Cartesian collision rules, derived from this framework, similarly failed to conserve force, dropping vis viva in examples like ball impacts from 10,001 to 5,100.5 units, contradicting causal adequacy. Turning to occasionalism, as advanced by Malebranche, Leibniz objected that it denies finite substances any genuine causal activity, reducing them to mere occasions for constant divine causation, which presupposes perpetual miracles and undermines the intelligibility of natural laws. In his letter to Arnauld on 30 April 1687, he argued this violates physical principles, such as requiring motion in bodies to explain bodily motion, by eliminating intrasubstantial activity and risking a slide toward Spinozism, where creatures become mere modifications of . A third critique held that occasionalism forces to disrupt ordinary natural courses repeatedly, conflicting with divine wisdom and the stability of creation. Leibniz's New System of the Nature and Communication of Substances (1695) positioned pre-established harmony as superior to both physical influx and occasionalism: synchronizes independent substances at creation to unfold in parallel, preserving their internal activity without ongoing interventions or interactions. This avoids Cartesian absurdities in force conservation and the miraculous constancy of occasionalism, grounding causation in the primitive forces inherent to substances.

Metaphysics and Theology

Monadology and the Nature of Substance

Leibniz's , composed in 1714, presents a metaphysical system positing that reality consists of monads, which are simple, indivisible substances serving as the fundamental units of . These monads are defined as entities without parts, incapable of division, and thus devoid of extension, shape, or divisibility, contrasting with material atoms or Cartesian extended substance. Leibniz argues that composite bodies, being aggregates of monads, derive their apparent unity from the coordinated perceptions within dominant monads, but true substances must possess intrinsic unity, which only simples can provide. The of a monad is characterized by two primary internal principles: and appetition. is the representation of the from the monad's unique perspective, varying in clarity among monads, while appetition denotes the internal drive or tendency for perceptions to transition from one state to another, ensuring perpetual change without external causation. Monads are "windowless," meaning they lack causal interaction with one another; all changes arise spontaneously from within, preordained by divine arrangement. This simplicity precludes multiplicity or composition, rendering monads the true atoms of —not , but metaphysical—eternal except for creation or annihilation by God. Leibniz rejects both mechanistic and purely extended substances, contending that in leads to no ultimate constituents, necessitating immaterial simples to ground phenomena. Monads form a based on perceptual distinctness: from bare monads with confused perceptions to animal souls with memory, culminating in rational spirits capable of and of eternal truths. This system upholds the principle that substances are complete notions containing all predicates, with each monad mirroring the entire in its internal states, ensuring the world's unity despite the plurality of substances.

Pre-Established Harmony

Pre-established harmony is the philosophical doctrine developed by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz to account for the apparent causal relations between mind and body, or more generally among substances, without positing direct interaction or continuous divine intervention. According to Leibniz, individual substances—termed monads—are metaphysically self-contained and incapable of influencing one another externally, as they lack "windows" through which perceptions or modifications could pass. Instead, the synchronization of mental perceptions with physical events stems from God's foresight in creating each monad with an internal principle of development that unfolds deterministically, ensuring perfect correspondence from the moment of creation onward. Leibniz first articulated elements of the theory in his Discourse on Metaphysics (written in 1686, published posthumously in 1710), where he addressed the unity of and body by denying influx from one to the other and proposing divine coordination. He elaborated the concept more fully in "A New System of the Nature and the Communication of Substances, and of the Union between the and the Body" (1695), employing the analogy of two perfectly synchronized clocks crafted by a master watchmaker: just as the clocks maintain agreement without mechanical linkage, substances align through God's preordained design rather than mutual causation. This mechanism preserves the spontaneity inherent to each substance's internal appetition and perception, aligning with Leibniz's that every state follows sufficiently from the substance's prior concept. In the (1714), Leibniz formalized the doctrine in sections 51–52, stating that body and soul "act as one" not through reciprocal action but because , choosing the best , established from the beginning a harmony whereby the soul's ideational states mirror the body's kinematic sequences. This pre-harmony extends universally: all monads represent the entire universe from their unique perspective, with their representations converging in harmonious detail according to their clarity, thus explaining inter-substantial relations without violating monadic isolation. Leibniz contrasted this with alternatives like Cartesian physical influx, which he deemed inexplicable due to the immateriality of mind and differing natures of substances, and occasionalism (as in Malebranche), which requires 's perpetual miraculous adjustments, undermining natural order and divine efficiency. By relying on a single creative act grounded in 's omniscience, pre-established harmony upholds causal realism within substances while attributing cosmic order to rational divine choice rather than ad hoc interventions.

Theodicy: Justification of God and Evil

Leibniz articulated his in the 1710 treatise Essais de Théodicée sur la bonté de Dieu, la liberté de l'homme et l'origine du mal, published in , which systematically defends the compatibility of 's , , and benevolence with the existence of . The work responds to contemporary challenges, including Pierre Bayle's skepticism in the Historical and Critical Dictionary, by arguing that does not negate divine perfection but arises as a necessary consequence within the optimal cosmic order freely selected from infinite possibilities. Leibniz posits that , as a supremely rational being bound by of sufficient reason, could not have chosen otherwise than the world maximizing harmony, variety, and perfection while minimizing imperfections, rendering the best possible despite apparent evils. Central to Leibniz's justification is the doctrine that this embodies the greatest possible balance of goods, where serve instrumental roles in achieving higher unavailable in purely good alternatives. He distinguishes three types of : metaphysical evil as mere privation or lack of in finite substances, rather than a positive entity; physical evil, encompassing and natural calamities, which contribute to the world's richness by enabling contrasts that enhance overall order and development; and , stemming from rational creatures' , which God permits to allow genuine and , outweighing the defects it introduces. For instance, free will's potential for is justified because a without such would lack the superior goods of redemption, heroism, and voluntary obedience, which elevate the aggregate beyond what deterministic alone could provide. Leibniz further contends that eliminating any specific would disrupt the pre-established among monads, unraveling compossible perfections across the entire , as 's choice optimizes the whole rather than isolated parts. s, thus, are not gratuitous but hypothetically necessary— could have created a world without them, but no such world would surpass ours in net goodness, as infinite discerns that greater variety demands some for maximal coherence. This framework reconciles divine foreknowledge with human by locating contingency in the infinite array of possible worlds, where selects the one aligning maximal with minimal , affirming that apparent imperfections reflect human limited perspective rather than divine shortcomings.

Optimism and Its Implications

Doctrine of the Best Possible World

Leibniz articulated the doctrine of the best possible world in his Théodicée (1710), asserting that , possessing infinite wisdom, power, and benevolence, necessarily selects the optimal world from an infinite array of to actualize. This choice reflects divine perfection, as any lesser world would contradict God's nature, which compels the creation of the richest harmony of compatible substances—termed monads—maximizing variety and order while minimizing necessary imperfections. Central to the doctrine is the concept of compossibility: possible worlds consist of sets of individual concepts or monads whose attributes can coexist without contradiction, with choosing the compossible set yielding the greatest , measured by the abundance of phenomena derivable from the fewest principles. Leibniz argued that apparent evils—such as moral faults or physical sufferings—are not positive entities but privations or shadows that enhance overall goodness through contrast, , and causal chains leading to higher goods, ensuring no world without such elements could achieve equivalent diversity and interconnectedness. The doctrine implies metaphysical , where contingency arises from God's free decree among possibles, yet the actual world's superiority follows analytically from divine attributes and of sufficient reason, which demands a rationale for God's preference beyond mere possibility. Leibniz countered objections by noting that human imagination of "better" worlds overlooks hidden defects or reduced global harmony, as infinite wisdom alone comprehends the full optimization of finite realities within infinite potentials.

Rational Defense Against Pessimism

Leibniz countered , which views the world's evils as evidence against , by asserting that God created the best , wherein imperfections are necessary for achieving maximal overall harmony and variety. In his (1710), he reasoned that an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent would select, from infinite , the one optimizing —defined as the richest diversity of phenomena produced by the fewest principles—over any lesser alternative. This doctrine implies that apparent arises from incomplete human comprehension, focusing on local sufferings while ignoring the global of goods exceeding evils. Central to this defense is the principle of sufficient reason, which demands a rationale for God's choice: absent a better , this one must embody the highest feasible good, as divine wisdom precludes suboptimal outcomes. Leibniz illustrated this through metaphysical necessity, arguing that pure uniformity (a without contrasts) would yield monotony inferior to our 's dynamic interplay of order and contingency, where evils like enable virtues such as and . Thus, no evil is gratuitous; each contributes to a pre-established maximizing existential plenitude, refuting manichaean dualism or atheistic despair by subordinating disvalue to superior value. Responding to Pierre Bayle's skeptical challenges in the Historical and Critical Dictionary (1697), which questioned reconciling , , and God's attributes, Leibniz maintained that overlooks possible compensations invisible to finite minds—such as remote goods stemming from proximate ills—and the impossibility of a world free from all limitation without ceasing to be finite creation. He emphasized empirical observation of in and as partial evidence of optimization, urging rational inquiry over emotional lamentation to discern underlying rationality. This framework posits not as naive positivity but as a logical entailment of theistic premises, rendering irrational absent proof of a superior unrealized world.

Criticisms from Contemporaries and Modern Views

Voltaire, a prominent contemporary critic, satirized Leibniz's doctrine in his 1759 novella Candide, ou l'Optimisme, portraying the character Pangloss as an unwavering proponent of the idea that "all is for the best in this best of all possible worlds," even amid disasters like the Lisbon earthquake of November 1, 1755, which devastated the city and prompted widespread questioning of divine providence. This work directly targeted Leibniz's optimism as callous or detached from human suffering, arguing that empirical evils—such as natural calamities and moral atrocities—render the claim implausible. Pierre Bayle, whose Dictionnaire historique et critique (1697) raised acute problems of by questioning how an omnipotent, benevolent God permits evil, indirectly challenged optimistic resolutions; Leibniz's Essais de (1710) was explicitly framed as a to Bayle's , yet Bayle's emphasis on the incomprehensibility of divine highlighted perceived gaps in reconciling with observed imperfections. Other early detractors, including reviewers in the Jesuit Mémoires de Trévoux (where the term "optimisme" was coined in 1737), faulted Leibniz for underestimating evil's prevalence, viewing his system as overly speculative rather than grounded in experiential reality. In modern philosophy, inverted Leibniz's thesis, contending in works like The World as Will and Representation (1818) that this world approximates the worst of all possible worlds, as any greater suffering would preclude continued existence, thereby critiquing as a failure to grasp the inherent pessimism of willing and striving amid inevitable pain. , in his Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz (1900), identified as the "weakest part" of Leibniz's system, dismissing it as a contrived rationalization that evades the brute facts of contingency and without sufficient causal justification. Contemporary assessments often reinforce these objections by invoking the problem of gratuitous or "horrendous" evils—acts or events causing irredeemable harm that appear disproportionate to any purported greater good—arguing that Leibniz's framework inadequately explains why an optimal world necessitates such extremes, potentially prioritizing logical possibility over empirical adequacy. Defenders, however, maintain that critiques overlook Leibniz's distinction between apparent and metaphysical necessity, where evils serve as contrasts enabling higher-order goods like free will and virtue, though skeptics counter that alternative worlds without such contrasts could achieve equivalent or superior harmony.

Mathematics

Invention of Calculus and Notation


Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz formulated the core concepts of independently during his residence in from 1672 to 1676, building on earlier work in tangents, quadratures, and series expansions. His approach emphasized as infinitesimally small increments, treating them via the law of continuity that extended finite differences to vanishing quantities. In a dated 29 October 1675, Leibniz first introduced the ∫, derived from the elongated Latin "S" for summa, to denote the of infinitesimal areas under a . This notation represented the inverse of differentiation, conceptualizing integration as an infinite sum of rectangular strips with widths dx.
By 21 November 1675, in another unpublished manuscript, Leibniz applied his differential calculus to derive the product rule for differentiation, d(uv) = u dv + v du, alongside the integral notation ∫ f(x) dx. He viewed derivatives as ratios of differentials, dy/dx, where dy and dx were infinitely small changes in y and x, respectively, allowing resolution of problems in maxima, minima, and tangents without explicit limits. This fractional notation for the derivative, first systematically presented in print, facilitated algebraic manipulation and remains standard in modern analysis. Leibniz's first public exposition appeared in the October 1684 Acta Eruditorum article "Nova Methodus pro Maximis et Minimis, itemque Tangentibus," which outlined the for optimization and tangent computation using rules like d(x + y) = dx + dy and the chain rule in nascent form. The paper demonstrated solving geometric problems, such as finding tangents to curves defined implicitly, by setting the differential to zero at extrema. His notation's algebraic flexibility contrasted with contemporaneous fluxional methods, enabling broader applications in physics and geometry, though it initially faced skepticism due to the metaphysical status of infinitesimals. Subsequent papers in 1686 and 1693 expanded to integrals and higher-order differentials, solidifying the framework.
Leibniz's innovations extended to fractional , as in his notation d^{1/2} y for half-order operations, anticipating later generalizations. These developments prioritized symbolic computation over geometric intuition, influencing the subject's evolution toward rigorous analysis in the .

Binary System and Combinatorics

Leibniz's engagement with originated in his youth, culminating in the 1666 publication of , an extension of his thesis submitted that year. In this treatise, he envisioned ars combinatoria as a universal method to generate knowledge by systematically combining primitive concepts into complex ones, akin to how numbers arise from units. Leibniz derived theorems on permutations and combinations, distinguishing between similitudo (similarity in order) and identitas (identity), and applied these to fields like logic, , and memory arts, proposing a framework for mechanical reasoning and invention. This work laid groundwork for his lifelong pursuit of a , a symbolic language for resolving disputes through calculation rather than argumentation. Building on , Leibniz advanced binary arithmetic in the late 1670s, perfecting a system using only the digits and 1 by around 1679. He described algorithms for , , , and division in base 2, including methods to convert numbers to binary representations, viewing the dyadic structure as philosophically profound—1 symbolizing divine unity and void, illustrating creation from nothingness. Unlike systems requiring multiple symbols, binary's simplicity aligned with Leibniz's combinatorial ideal of deriving multiplicity from minimal elements, facilitating potential . Leibniz first detailed binary publicly in the 1703 memoir Explication de l'Arithmétique Binaire, published in the Mémoires de l'Académie Royale des Sciences. In 1701, corresponding with Jesuit Joachim Bouvet, he discovered parallels between binary sequences and the I Ching's 64 hexagrams, formed by combining broken (0) and solid (1) lines—yet this resemblance confirmed rather than inspired his prior invention, as binary predated his exposure to the Chinese text. These contributions anticipated digital computation, though underappreciated in Leibniz's era, by emphasizing exhaustive enumeration of possibilities through binary combinations.

Contributions to Geometry and Topology

Leibniz advanced by integrating methods with classical problems, notably in the quadrature of conic sections, where he employed arithmetic techniques to compute areas bounded by parabolas, ellipses, and hyperbolas without relying solely on traditional exhaustion methods. In 1674, he distinguished between geometric curves, constructible via and compass, and mechanical curves, generated by continuous motion, thereby extending the scope of to transcendental forms amenable to . These efforts reflected his broader aim to unify analysis with , as seen in his manuscripts on perspective and projective properties, influenced by Desargues' work on conic sections. Leibniz's most visionary geometric contribution was his proposal for analysis situs, or "analysis of position," conceived in the late 1670s as a qualitative geometry focused on relational invariants rather than metric quantities like length or angle. This framework sought to characterize spatial configurations through combinatorial invariants—properties preserved under continuous deformations, such as connectivity and order—anticipating modern topology by prioritizing "position" over measurable size. In unpublished notes and correspondence, he defined similarity in analysis situs as equivalence where no observable difference exists in isolated views, emphasizing topological equivalence over Euclidean congruence. Tied to his characteristica geometrica, a symbolic language for spatial reasoning, analysis situs aimed to formalize via abstract characters, bridging it with logic and his monadological of space as relational order among point-like substances. Though unrealized in his lifetime due to incomplete development, these ideas influenced later mathematicians; explicitly adopted the term for his 1895 work on topological invariants, crediting Leibniz's foundational intuition. Leibniz's approach underscored causal realism in , deriving spatial truths from primitive relational notions rather than empirical metrics, thus laying groundwork for non-metric geometries.

Calculus Priority Controversy

Chronology of Discoveries

Newton's development of the , termed the , originated during his isolation from due to the plague in 1665–1666, when he formulated concepts of flowing quantities (fluents) and their rates of change (fluxions), including rules for differentiation and integration via infinite series. In October 1666, he drafted an unpublished tract on fluxions, which was shared privately with contemporaries like and influenced early adopters, though it emphasized geometric interpretations over algebraic notation. By 1669, Newton composed De analysi per aequationes numero terminorum infinitas, a on infinite series expansions that served as a precursor to fluxional methods for solving geometric problems, circulated among British mathematicians but not widely published until 1711. In 1671, he completed the treatise and Infinite Series, systematically outlining the direct (differentiation) and inverse (integration) processes, with applications to areas under curves and motion, yet this remained in form until its posthumous release in 1736. Leibniz independently pursued infinitesimal methods in the early 1670s, building on studies of Cavalieri's indivisibles and Huygens' geometry during his Paris residence from 1672. In November 1675, his notebooks record pivotal notations, including dx and dy for infinitesimal differences and the elongated S (later ∫) for summing them into integrals, alongside algorithms for tangents and quadratures. Leibniz's first public exposition appeared in October 1684 with Nova Methodus pro Maximis et Minimis, itemque Tangentibus in Acta Eruditorum, detailing differential rules for extrema, tangents, and singularities using characteristic triangles of infinitesimals. He extended this to integral calculus in a 1686 Acta Eruditorum article, formalizing the inverse operation as a discrete sum of infinitesimals. Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687) incorporated fluxions geometrically for orbital mechanics, without explicit notation, while his first overt publication of fluxional calculus occurred in 1704 as an appendix to Opticks. This temporal sequence—Newton's private priority in the 1660s versus Leibniz's earlier dissemination—underpinned the ensuing controversy, with claims of plagiarism hinging on 1676 correspondence between the two via intermediaries like John Collins.

Accusations of Plagiarism and Royal Society Involvement

In 1708, John Keill, a supporter of , published an article in the Philosophical Transactions of the explicitly accusing Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz of Newton's method of fluxions, claiming that Leibniz had derived his differential calculus from unpublished manuscripts shared via intermediaries like and John Collins during Leibniz's 1676 visit to . Leibniz vehemently denied the charge, asserting independent invention and pointing to his own earlier manuscripts, such as those from 1675, and petitioned the in November 1710 for an impartial committee to examine the evidence and clear his name. The Royal Society, presided over by Newton since 1703, appointed a committee in 1711 consisting largely of Newton's allies, including and others predisposed to favor the Englishman; Newton himself played a central role in directing the inquiry and drafting its output. The committee's report, Commercium Epistolicum Collinii et aliorum de analysi promota, was published in 1712 and compiled correspondence from 1669 to 1676 to demonstrate Newton's priority in key analytical methods, while implying—without a direct formal accusation—that Leibniz had accessed and adapted Newton's ideas, particularly through misinterpreted letters and notes. Leibniz was not afforded a full opportunity to review or rebut the committee's findings before publication, and the Royal Society declined to print his detailed 1713 response, Charta chronologica, which argued for his independent development based on unpublished notebooks predating 1676; the report's partisan composition and Newton's undisclosed authorship of significant portions undermined its impartiality, as later historical analyses have noted. Despite the accusations' intent to discredit Leibniz, the Commercium focused more on establishing chronological precedence than proving , though it fueled continental toward the 's proceedings and prolonged the dispute until Leibniz's death in 1716.

Resolution and Historical Assessments

The Royal Society, with serving as president, appointed a committee in 1711 to investigate the priority dispute, culminating in the publication of Commercium Epistolicum Collinii et aliorum de analysi promota in 1712, which purported to demonstrate Newton's priority through correspondence records and concluded that Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz had derived his methods from earlier English sources without acknowledgment. This report, largely authored by Newton himself under pseudonymous oversight, emphasized Newton's unpublished manuscripts from 1669 onward and letters exchanged via intermediaries like John Collins and between 1670 and 1676, alleging Leibniz's familiarity with nascent fluxional ideas during his 1673 London visit. Leibniz contested the findings in anonymous responses published in the Acta Eruditorum starting in 1713, petitioning the Academy of Sciences for in 1715, but received no binding resolution before his death on November 14, 1716; the controversy persisted into Newton's lifetime, exacerbating nationalistic tensions between English and Continental mathematicians. No formal contemporary adjudication settled the matter, as Leibniz's supporters, including , continued defenses via anonymous publications, while Newtonian allies like upheld the Royal Society's verdict; the dispute's acrimony is evidenced by Newton's orchestration of biased proceedings, including suppression of exculpatory evidence like the limited content of the 1670s letters, which modern analysis shows did not disclose differential or integral techniques. Historical reassessments from the onward, such as Charles Bossut's 1803 Histoire des mathématiques, began critiquing the Commercium's partiality, attributing independent origins to both: Newton's fluxions developed circa 1665–1666 during his , unpublished until 1687 in the Principia, versus Leibniz's differentials formalized by 1675 and first published in Nova Methodus (1684). By the 19th and 20th centuries, scholarly consensus solidified around dual independent invention, with Newton's conceptual priority in handling infinitesimals for physical problems like planetary motion, but Leibniz's superior notation (e.g., dydx\frac{dy}{dx} for ) enabling broader and pedagogical clarity, as in analyses of primary manuscripts showing no —Leibniz lacked access to Newton's core texts, and similarities arose from shared mathematical heritage including Cavalieri and Wallis. This view, supported by archival examinations, rejects plagiarism charges as unsubstantiated, crediting both as co-founders while noting the dispute's hindrance to collaborative progress; for instance, the Prussian Academy under Leibniz's influence later endorsed mutual recognition in deliberations, though without resolving Anglo-Continental divides.

Logic and Universal Language

Characteristica Universalis Project

Leibniz conceived the Characteristica Universalis as a universal symbolic language designed to encapsulate all concepts and propositions with unambiguous precision, enabling mechanical resolution of intellectual disputes through computation rather than verbal argumentation. This system aimed to represent primitive notions—irreducible simple ideas—as basic symbols, which could then be combined according to fixed rules mirroring algebraic operations, thereby reducing reasoning to a form of calculation. The project's core ambition was to render philosophy and science demonstrative, akin to geometry, by eliminating the ambiguities inherent in natural languages and allowing truths to be derived algorithmically; Leibniz encapsulated this ideal in his call to "calculemus" ("let us calculate"), envisioning a world where controversies could be settled by performing operations on symbols rather than relying on persuasion or authority. The foundational ideas emerged from Leibniz's early work on , particularly his 1666 dissertation , which explored systematic combinations of concepts as a method for discovery and invention. During his Paris sojourn from 1672 to 1676, influenced by encounters with contemporary mathematical notations and prior attempts at artificial languages (such as those by Descartes and ), Leibniz intensified efforts to formalize the characteristic, linking it to his development of binary arithmetic as a potential numerical basis for symbolic representation. Key fragmentary writings from this period include the "Preface to a Universal Characteristic" (dated 1678–1679), which outlines the need for a comprehensive to catalog all primitive terms, and "Samples of the Numerical Characteristic" (1679), proposing numerical encodings for concepts to facilitate combinatorial analysis. Further notes, such as "Elements of a Universal Characteristic" from April 1679, detail experimental schemas for symbolizing logical relations, though these remained provisional and unpublished during his lifetime. Integral to the project was the paired concept of a , a rule-based inferential to manipulate the symbols, which Leibniz saw as extending his innovations in infinitesimal calculus to the realm of logic. He argued that true progress in knowledge required first identifying an exhaustive set of primitives through empirical and rational analysis, then deriving complex truths via exhaustive combinations, potentially aided by machines for computation. However, the endeavor faced insurmountable hurdles: the sheer volume of primitives needed (Leibniz estimated thousands across disciplines), the challenge of ensuring symbols captured causal essences without circularity, and the prerequisite of a universal encyclopedia, which he partially pursued through correspondence and library catalogs but never systematized. Despite these obstacles, the project persisted in Leibniz's later writings, such as proposals in the 1690s for integrating it with diplomatic and scientific collaboration, though it remained unrealized at his in 1716. Although incomplete, the anticipated formal systems in modern logic and computing, influencing subsequent efforts to mathematize reasoning, as evidenced by its role in inspiring 19th-century developments in symbolic algebra despite Leibniz's own acknowledgment of the primitive state of his schemas. Leibniz's insistence on grounding the language in metaphysical realism—treating symbols as reflections of monadic substances—distinguished it from mere notational reforms, underscoring his commitment to a causal framework where formal deduction mirrored ontological necessity.

Formal Logic and Syllogistic Innovations

Leibniz's early engagement with formal logic, particularly syllogistics, began in his 1666 dissertation , where he applied combinatorial methods to systematically enumerate the possible forms of categorical syllogisms, treating premises as permutations of terms to identify valid moods beyond Aristotle's traditional figures. This approach allowed for a complete cataloging of syllogistic structures, revealing redundancies and independencies in the axioms of Aristotelian logic, such as demonstrating that certain rules could be derived from others without circularity. By assigning numerical values to propositional types—such as universal affirmative (A) as 3 and particular negative (O) as 0—Leibniz attempted an arithmetization of syllogisms, enabling algebraic verification of validity through operations like addition and subtraction to model inclusion and exclusion of terms. In his later manuscript Generales Inquisitiones de Analysi Notionum et Veritatum (composed around 1686), Leibniz advanced syllogistic innovations by introducing a symbolic calculus of terms that incorporated complex and hypothetical propositions, extending beyond simple categorical forms to handle conditionals like "if A then B" through propositional compounds. He formalized rules for inference using notations such as A + B for conjunction and negation symbols, aiming to reduce syllogistic reasoning to mechanical combination and resolution processes that mirrored arithmetic, thereby laying groundwork for a universal logical language. Among his contributions to propositional logic, Leibniz formulated the Praeclarum Theorema, or "splendid theorem," a tautology stating that if A is B and C is D, then (A and C) is (B and D). This calculus emphasized conceptual containment, where validity arises from the subset relation between predicate notions within subjects, allowing Leibniz to critique and refine traditional syllogisms by distinguishing simple from composite terms and addressing limitations in handling existential imports. Leibniz's innovations also included an analysis of hypothetical syllogisms using "propositional terms," treating entire propositions as subjects or predicates to chain inferences, as in deriving conclusions from nested conditionals without reducing to pure categorical forms. These developments, while unpublished during his lifetime, anticipated algebraic logics by prioritizing formal manipulability over intuitive validity, though Leibniz acknowledged practical challenges in scaling the method to all inferences, noting that exhaustive enumeration yielded 256 potential premise pairs but required additional metaphysical principles like the for full rigor. His work thus bridged traditional syllogistic with emerging symbolic methods, emphasizing logic's potential as a computable rather than mere dialectical tool.

Influence on Modern Symbolic Logic

Leibniz envisioned a characteristica universalis, a universal symbolic language composed of primitive concepts that could express all truths, paired with a calculus ratiocinator to perform mechanical computations on those symbols, thereby resolving disputes through calculation rather than verbal debate. This framework, outlined in unpublished manuscripts from the 1670s to 1690s, anticipated the formalization of logic as a symbolic system where propositions are manipulated algebraically, much like arithmetic operations. In his algebra of concepts, Leibniz developed a system for relations between terms, where s are combined via (AB denotes the common to A and B) and complemented via privation (A' denotes what is not A). Key axioms included reflexivity ("Every A is A"), monotonicity ("Every AB is A"), and double privation ("The privative of the privative of A is A"), forming a sound and complete relative to algebras. This structure, detailed in works like the Generales Inquisitiones de Analysi Notionum et Veritatum (c. 1686), provided a complete axiomatization of the sentential fragment of 160 years before George Boole's The Mathematical Analysis of Logic (1847). Leibniz's approach extended traditional syllogistic by incorporating rules for hypothetical reasoning and strict implication, such as "If A contains B and B contains C, then A contains C," enabling equational manipulations akin to modern substitution rules. He also anticipated truth-functional completeness by enumerating combinations of truth values for propositions, as in his analysis of conditional statements where validity holds unless the antecedent is true and consequent false. These elements prefigured operations (conjunction as intersection, disjunction via complements) and the lattice structure of propositional logic. Though unpublished during his lifetime and exerting no direct influence on 19th-century pioneers like Boole or Frege, Leibniz's logical writings were rediscovered in the early , shaping interpretations of formal systems. , in his 1900 A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz, recognized Leibniz's innovations in reducing reasoning to symbolic rules, crediting him with advancing formal logic beyond while critiquing inconsistencies in application. This legacy informed the development of , where symbolic notation and calculi enable rigorous proof verification, echoing Leibniz's goal of a universal method for truth adjudication.

Physics and Natural Philosophy

Vis Viva and Conservation Laws

Leibniz introduced the concept of vis viva, or "living force," as a measure of a body's motive power proportional to the product of its mass and the square of its velocity, denoted as mv2mv^2. He argued this quantity better captured the causal efficacy of motion than the Cartesian conservation of simple (mvmv), which failed to account for empirical outcomes in inelastic collisions and falling bodies. In his 1686 essay "Brevis demonstratio erroris memorabilis Cartesii et aliorum circa legem naturae," published in the Acta Eruditorum, Leibniz demonstrated that Descartes' rule of mvmv conservation led to absurd predictions, such as a large slow body transferring all motion to a small fast one in collision, contrary to observation. Leibniz contended that vis viva is conserved in the universe as a whole, reflecting divine pre-established and the principle of sufficient reason, whereby conserves the total quantity of force without arbitrary loss or gain. For elastic collisions of hard bodies, he accepted conservation of both and vis viva, but for soft or inelastic impacts—common in nature—vis viva persists as the invariant while directed disperses into undirected agitation. He supported this with thought experiments, such as two identical clay balls colliding and sticking, where final vis viva matches initial despite halving, aligning with causal realism over Descartes' mechanical a priori assumptions. This framework prefigured modern conservation, though Leibniz equated vis viva metaphysically to primitive in substances, distinct from dead force (mvmv) as mere kinematic description. The doctrine sparked prolonged debate, with Cartesians defending as the sole conserved quantity and Newtonians later questioning vis viva's status amid emerging dynamics, yet empirical validations in experiments and impacts substantiated Leibniz's emphasis on squared . By the mid-18th century, vis viva gained traction as a conserved dynamical , influencing Helmholtz's 1847 formulation of .

Dynamics Versus Newtonian Mechanics

Leibniz developed his theory of dynamics primarily in the Specimen Dynamicum published in the Acta Eruditorum in 1695, positing that the fundamental forces in nature are primitive active forces inherent to substances, from which derivative forces like momentum and vis viva arise. He distinguished vis primitiva (a body's capacity to resist change, analogous to mass), vis activa motrix (momentum, mv), and vis viva (living force, proportional to mv²), arguing that vis viva is the true measure of force conserved in perfectly elastic collisions, as demonstrated by thought experiments involving pendulums and falling bodies where mv alone fails to predict outcomes. This contrasted with Newtonian mechanics, where force is defined mathematically as the rate of change of momentum (F = d(mv)/dt), and conservation applies to momentum in isolated systems without external forces, as outlined in Newton's Principia Mathematica (1687). Leibniz critiqued Newton's approach for reducing dynamics to kinematic quantities without grounding in metaphysical , insisting that forces must be explained through the appetites and perceptions of monads rather than abstract absolute space, which he rejected as an unnecessary entity. In the Leibniz-Clarke correspondence (1715–1716), initiated by , Leibniz argued that space is relational—an ideal order of coexistences among bodies—rather than Newton's absolute, independent container, using the principle of sufficient reason to claim that would not create indistinguishable worlds differing only in absolute position. Similarly, he viewed time as the order of non-coexistent successions, denying absolute duration, which undermined Newton's bucket experiment purporting to detect through centrifugal effects independent of relative motion. Newtonian mechanics posits absolute motion detectable via inertial forces, enabling a universal frame for gravitation as , which Leibniz deemed "occult" and unmechanical, preferring explanations via contact actions or vortices to maintain causal realism in extended bodies. Leibniz's dynamics aimed for a harmonious where conservation of reflects divine pre-established harmony, preserving energy-like quantities before their modern formulation, though empirical tests like inelastic collisions revealed limitations later addressed by incorporating and . Clarke, defending Newton, countered that absolute space ensures God's and uniform laws, but Leibniz maintained that relational dynamics suffices without positing unobservable absolutes, influencing later relational theories in physics.

Empirical Observations in Geology and Biology

Leibniz conducted extensive fieldwork in the Mountains during the 1680s while investigating methods to power silver mines with windmills, yielding direct empirical insights into subterranean . He documented stratified rock formations, deposits, and systems, including detailed examinations of Baumann's Cave where he observed fossilized bones of absent in contemporary , such as large quadrupeds embedded in layers. These observations underscored patterns of and , with Leibniz noting the irregular distribution of metallic ores and the role of water infiltration in shaping underground channels. In his unpublished manuscript Protogaea (composed circa 1690–1693, with an abstract appearing in Acta Eruditorum in ), Leibniz synthesized these field data into a physical model of Earth's formation, positing that the originated as a , nitre-infused mass that cooled and contracted, generating internal pressures responsible for mountain uplift and entrapment. He empirically classified glossopetrae—tongue-shaped stones—as petrified teeth, citing their anatomical correspondence to modern specimens and inferring prehistoric marine inundations over inland regions like based on their stratigraphic positions. The work features twelve engraved plates illustrating cross-sections of Harz caverns and , drawn from Leibniz's collections and emphasizing verifiable morphological matches between fossils and living organisms. Leibniz's paleontological observations bridged and by affirming s as genuine remnants of extinct life forms, rejecting scholastic notions of "sports of " or formative forces in favor of causal preservation through sedimentary burial. Aligning with Nicolaus Steno's principles, he argued that shells and bones retained organic textures and orientations consistent with rapid entombment during cataclysmic events, such as deluges, evidenced by upright tree trunks and articulated skeletons in his samples. This empirical stance anticipated uniformitarian , with Leibniz quantifying distributions to map ancient ecosystems. In , Leibniz engaged empirical to explore organismal structure, drawing on seventeenth-century advancements by and Marcello Malpighi to support preformationist theories of development. He cited microscopic views of insect eggs and embryonic forms revealing pre-packaged miniature organisms, interpreting these as evidence of nested, unfolding structures rather than , with observations of seminal animalcules suggesting perpetual organic continuity from creation. Such data reinforced his mechanistic yet vitalistic view of as aggregated forces manifesting empirically in observable growth patterns and regeneration, as in worms.

Engineering and Technology

Calculating Machines and Prototypes

Leibniz initiated work on mechanical calculating devices in the late 1660s, inspired by a that suggested potential for automated arithmetic . Seeking to surpass Blaise Pascal's , which handled only and through geared wheels with fixed teeth, Leibniz aimed for a capable of and division directly. His design incorporated a crank-driven mechanism to perform all four basic operations: , , , and division. The core innovation was the staffelwalze or stepped drum, later termed the , featuring a cylindrical gear with teeth of graduated lengths along its axis. This allowed a single revolution to engage 0 to 9 teeth with a corresponding rack, enabling variable digit representation for efficient via repeated and shifting, while division used analogous reversal. Leibniz described the device as the instrumentum arithmeticum in early proposals, emphasizing its potential to reduce in calculations. Conceived around 1671–1672 during his sojourn, the prototype emerged by 1673, though full operational models required further refinement. Leibniz collaborated with Parisian craftsmen, including Ole Mortensen, to construct early versions, but precision machining limitations—such as inconsistent tooth profiles and unreliable carry propagation—hindered reliability. He later dispatched detailed mémoires outlining carry mechanism improvements, yet prototypes suffered from jamming and inaccuracy under extended use. Subsequent efforts yielded additional prototypes, including one completed between 1692 and 1694 and another around 1706, demonstrating the design's feasibility despite persistent mechanical flaws. These machines measured approximately 67 cm in length and employed components for durability, but their complexity demanded skilled operation and frequent adjustments. The principle endured, influencing calculators for two centuries until electronic alternatives supplanted mechanical gears. Despite incomplete success in his lifetime, the prototypes underscored Leibniz's vision for as a tool augmenting human reason in scientific inquiry.

Hydraulic and Mining Innovations

Leibniz engaged extensively with in the Mountains from 1679 onward, tasked by Johann Friedrich of Brunswick-Lüneburg to enhance the productivity of silver mines plagued by flooding, which restricted depths to around 100 meters and limited extraction. His initial proposals, formulated after a 1679 visit to the region, emphasized harnessing and power for mechanical drainage to enable deeper and increase yields. Between 1680 and 1686, he made over 30 visits to the , dedicating nearly three years to on-site assessments and designs, including pumps, , and windmills aimed at continuous water expulsion. A core innovation was Leibniz's advocacy for wind-driven water pumps, which he envisioned as a reliable alternative to labor-intensive manual or animal-powered systems, integrating vertical and horizontal windmills to drive pistons and Archimedean screws for lifting water. He proposed recycling drainage water by channeling it into retention ponds for reuse in sequential pumping stages, an early conceptualization of closed-loop hydraulic systems that anticipated modern pumped-storage principles and reduced dependency on variable river flows. These designs incorporated geared mechanisms to amplify from intermittent winds, with prototypes tested in the Upper districts like Clausthal and , where he collaborated with local engineers on feasibility studies. Despite theoretical ingenuity, Leibniz's hydraulic projects yielded limited practical success; windmill-based drainage proved unreliable due to inconsistent and mechanical wear, failing to substantially boost output beyond incremental gains from existing water-wheel adits installed since the 1560s. Administrative hurdles, including resistance from mine officials skeptical of unproven innovations, further hampered implementation, though his efforts advanced broader discourse on mechanized resource extraction and influenced subsequent German treatises. Leibniz's work underscored causal challenges in applying abstract to empirical site conditions, prioritizing scalable power over static .

Advocacy for Technological Progress

Leibniz viewed technological advancements as a primary vehicle for enhancing human productivity and societal welfare, emphasizing their capacity to multiply individual labor. In discussions on promoting the arts and sciences, he highlighted the transformative potential of mechanical inventions, noting that a heat-powered machine could enable one person to perform the work of "a hundred others," thereby reducing toil and fostering economic abundance. This perspective underscored his belief that systematic invention would alleviate physical burdens and elevate living standards through rational application of science to practical challenges. To realize such progress, Leibniz actively advocated for dedicated institutions to coordinate and incentivize technological innovation. He proposed societies focused on the collection of inventions, experimental verification, and dissemination of useful knowledge, arguing that such bodies would secure "the good conscience and immortal glory of the founders" while serving the public good by accelerating discoveries in mechanics, hydraulics, and manufacturing. Drawing models from the Royal Society, established in London on December 28, 1660, and the Académie Royale des Sciences, founded in Paris on December 22, 1666, Leibniz envisioned broader "pansophistic" organizations integrating theoretical and applied sciences to systematically advance technology beyond isolated efforts. His advocacy extended to practical reforms, including the economic valuation of inventions to encourage creators; he observed that even modest technological improvements, such as better plows or windmills, yielded substantial returns by optimizing resource use in agriculture and industry. Leibniz's involvement in founding the Societät der Wissenschaften (later the ) in on July 11, 1700—where he served as inaugural president—exemplified this commitment, as the academy prioritized collaborative projects in , , and to drive empirical and inventive progress. Through these initiatives, he positioned not merely as utilitarian but as integral to intellectual and moral elevation, synthesizing diverse knowledge streams for cumulative advancement.

Theory of Justice and Natural Law

Leibniz's early engagement with culminated in his 1667 dissertation Nova Methodus Discendae Docendaeque Jurisprudentiae, which proposed a logical reorganization of legal studies by classifying concepts into genera and , drawing on Aristotelian categories to deduce and duties from fundamental principles. This work emphasized that should proceed deductively from self-evident axioms, such as the preservation of society, rather than relying solely on historical precedents or compilations. He argued that governs innate human associations, starting with the unit between spouses for , extending to broader civil societies bound by rational and mutual benefit. In his mature philosophy, Leibniz defined justice as caritas sapientis—the charity or benevolence of the wise—positing it as a rational optimization of universal happiness through proportionate distribution of goods, independent of arbitrary divine commands or social utility alone. This concept, first articulated around 1678 and refined in unpublished essays like the Meditatio de Communi Conceptu Juris et Justitiae (ca. 1702–1703), frames justice not as mere equity (aequum) but as wise love that discerns interconnected goods in a divinely ordered , where actions promote the greatest overall . Unlike strict legalism, it incorporates teleological reasoning: just acts align with the pre-established harmony of monads, reflecting God's selection of the optimal world from infinite possibilities. Leibniz critiqued voluntarist natural law theorists like Samuel Pufendorf, whom he accused in works such as Specimen Controversiarum (1706) of reducing to divine fiat or human convention, thereby undermining its rational universality and failing to ground duties in metaphysical necessity. Instead, he maintained that derives deductively from eternal verities of reason and proportion, applicable even hypothetically without observers, as inheres in the intrinsic congruity of actions to cosmic order. This rationalist foundation led him to condemn practices like as violations of human dignity and natural equity, arguing they contradict the equality of rational souls under . His theory thus bridges metaphysics and , positing that sovereigns, as stewards of , must emulate divine wisdom to foster societal harmony rather than mere power enforcement.

Ecumenism: Reunion of Protestant and Catholic Churches

Leibniz, remaining steadfastly Lutheran, pursued church reunion as a rational imperative to restore doctrinal harmony and counter the existential threat of and confessional strife, arguing that divisions among contradicted the unity of truth inherent in divine revelation. His efforts emphasized compatibility between Protestant emphasis on scripture and reason with Catholic , proposing interpretations of sacraments and that preserved core Lutheran tenets like justification by faith while acknowledging patristic consensus. Influenced by early patrons such as Catholic statesman Johann Christian von Boineburg, Leibniz initiated reconciliation proposals as early as the 1670s in , drafting demonstrations to persuade Protestants of Catholic doctrinal validity without requiring wholesale submission. In 1683, amid negotiations for a preliminary Lutheran-Catholic union, Leibniz outlined as a prerequisite, insisting in correspondence that mutual on non-essential disputes—such as precise Eucharistic mechanisms—could precede formal , provided real presence was affirmed universally. By 1685, he composed unpublished Latin tracts adopting a Catholic to systematically defend reunion, conceding as historical primacy rather than infallible jurisdiction and harmonizing with via metaphysical nuance, though rejecting later scholastic excesses. These writings reflected his strategy of philosophical mediation, wherein reason elucidated scriptural ambiguities to reveal underlying agreement on the and rejection of radical Protestant or Catholic indulgences. The zenith of Leibniz's ecumenical diplomacy occurred in his protracted correspondence with , Bishop of , spanning 1691–1694 and resuming 1699–1702, where they dissected controversies including the clause, , and invocation of saints. Leibniz advocated Protestant reintegration into the Roman communion via conditional ordination of clergy (sub conditione) and doctrinal accommodations, such as viewing as non-literal, allowing Lutherans to retain Eucharistic practices while affirming unity under ; he countered Bossuet's insistence on unqualified acceptance of decrees by appealing to a rational consensus transcending juridical submission. Negotiations faltered by 1701, as Bossuet prioritized ecclesiastical hierarchy and full submission, which Leibniz critiqued as juridically absolutist and incompatible with Protestant , though he persisted in viewing reunion as feasible through enlightened council rather than . Leibniz's proposals extended to practical mechanisms, including a proposed general synod to adjudicate differences via shared patristic sources, eschewing both Protestant rigidity and Catholic magisterial exclusivity in favor of a syncretic framework blending with . Despite repeated failures—attributable to Catholic intransigence on and Protestant suspicion of compromise—his irenic theology underscored empirical historical continuity in , positing that schisms arose from misinterpretations resolvable by precise logical analysis rather than confessional entrenchment. This approach, while philosophically innovative, encountered resistance from orthodox elements on both sides, who deemed it overly conciliatory toward perceived heresies.

Views on Monarchy and Best Governance

Leibniz regarded monarchy as the most suitable form of government for extensive realms, arguing that a single sovereign head provided the unity and decisiveness necessary to avert anarchy and promote collective welfare, in contrast to the divisions inherent in pure aristocracy or democracy. He drew on historical precedents like the Holy Roman Empire, where monarchical authority coexisted with feudal liberties and estates, to advocate against the unchecked centralization seen in absolutist regimes. Critiquing absolutism as exemplified by Louis XIV's , Leibniz rejected the notion of as arbitrary will, insisting instead that rulers must govern by fixed laws and rational principles of to embody a —a state ruled by right rather than caprice. In works such as his (1710), he analogized ideal rule to divine monarchy in , where authority serves the under eternal reason, but for human polities, this required institutional restraints like assemblies and juristic traditions to curb potential tyranny. Leibniz's pragmatic endorsements, including support for elective or foreign monarchs in cases like Poland's 1669 interregnum, underscored his preference for competent, enlightened leadership over hereditary absolutism if the latter risked incompetence or factionalism. He envisioned Europe's best governance as a federal , balancing imperial oversight with regional autonomies to foster perpetual peace and mutual esteem among states, thereby mitigating the expansionist perils of isolated absolutisms. This structure, he contended, aligned with natural law's demands for harmony, where sovereigns act as stewards of providential order rather than despots.

Other Contributions

Sinophilia and Cross-Cultural Exchanges

Leibniz expressed admiration for Chinese civilization in his 1697 preface to Novissima Sinica, a compilation of Jesuit reports from , praising the empire's ethical practices, political stability, and moral as superior to 's in those domains, while acknowledging Europe's advances in experimental and Christian revelation. He argued that Chinese governance exemplified practical wisdom derived from natural reason, with a merit-based and emphasis on that contrasted with European factionalism. In this work, Leibniz advocated mutual learning: could benefit from Chinese moral and administrative models, while might adopt European scientific methods and religious truths. Leibniz engaged deeply with Jesuit missionaries, corresponding extensively with figures like Joachim Bouvet starting in November 1697, exchanging views on Chinese classics and ancient wisdom. He sided with in the , defending Confucian rituals and ancestor veneration as civic ceremonies compatible with , rather than idolatrous practices, positing that ancient Chinese texts preserved vestiges of primitive akin to . This stance reflected his ecumenical , viewing —particularly —as aligned with rational , though he critiqued its lack of explicit divine revelation and systematic metaphysics. A pivotal exchange occurred with Bouvet in 1701–1703, when Leibniz received diagrams of hexagrams, recognizing their structural similarity to his independently developed binary arithmetic system, which he had outlined as early as 1679 and published in 1703. The hexagrams, composed of broken (0) and solid (1) lines forming 64 combinations, mirrored binary sequences from 0 to 63, leading Leibniz to interpret this as evidence of a universal mathematical order discoverable by reason across cultures, possibly hinting at ancient Chinese knowledge of binary principles or . He wrote to Bouvet in 1703 that this convergence demonstrated "the most perfect knowledge of God," underscoring his belief in shared human access to fundamental truths. Leibniz also drew inspiration from for his , a proposed universal symbolic for precise reasoning, viewing the ideographic nature of hanzi—representing concepts directly rather than phonetically—as a potential model for unambiguous signs that could encode logical relations and facilitate . Upon learning of phonetic components in many characters, he adjusted his enthusiasm but retained the idea that such a system could bridge Eastern and Western thought, promoting global intellectual through formal calculi. These exchanges highlighted Leibniz's vision of synthesis, where empirical reports from informed his philosophy of universal and rational consensus.

Historiography of the Guelphs

In 1685, Elector Ernst August of Hanover commissioned Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz to compile a comprehensive history of the (Welf dynasty), rulers of Brunswick-Lüneburg, extending from ancient origins to the present as a means to document and elevate their imperial lineage and support dynastic ambitions, including potential claims to foreign thrones. This task, formalized as Leibniz's primary duty, involved rigorous archival research to trace connections, notably linking the German Guelphs to the medieval Italian through genealogical and , reflecting a blend of scholarly inquiry and courtly advocacy. Leibniz outlined his methodological approach in a Notitia, emphasizing chronological , critical evaluation of sources, and systematic collection of primary materials to establish factual continuity amid medieval obscurities. Leibniz pursued this project over three decades, amassing thousands of documents from European archives in , , , , and beyond. A pivotal effort was his extended research journey from 1687 to 1690 across , , and , where he accessed Vatican libraries in and Este family records in to substantiate the dynastic linkage, uncovering charters and chronicles that bolstered claims of ancient dating to the . This work highlighted Leibniz's proto-scientific , prioritizing verifiable originals over legends, though its commissioned nature introduced a selective emphasis on glorifying the Guelphs' imperial heritage, as evidenced by his focus on figures like and early Carolingian ties. Despite prodigious output, including preliminary annals and genealogies, the full narrative history remained incomplete at Leibniz's death in 1716, overwhelmed by the project's vast scope spanning over a millennium. Key publications included the three-volume Scriptores rerum Brunsvicensium (1707–1711), a critical edition of pre-Reformation sources illuminating Brunswick's medieval history, and fragments of Annales Imperii Occidentis Brunsvicenses, which chronicled imperial events tied to Guelph rulers from 877 onward. Posthumous editions preserved much of the material, influencing later Welf historiography, though scholars note the endeavor's partiality toward dynastic legitimacy over detached analysis. Leibniz's efforts advanced standards in source criticism and documentary compilation, prefiguring modern paleography and diplomatic history.

Promotion of Scientific Societies and Libraries

Leibniz demonstrated a lifelong commitment to institutionalizing scientific inquiry through dedicated societies, beginning with his role as secretary of the Collegium Curiosum sive Experimentale in 1666, an early German experimental group. In 1667, he proposed the Societas Eruditorum Germaniae, a pan-German that would include a universal library for compiling and indexing scholarly works alongside a biannual journal to disseminate findings. These early initiatives reflected his vision of collaborative networks to advance , drawing models from the Royal Society of (established 1660) and the French Académie des Sciences (founded 1666). In 1671, while in , Leibniz authored memoranda advocating a under electoral patronage to cultivate inventors, establish experimental laboratories, and promote practical applications in crafts and mechanics, including the summarization and cataloging of manuscripts for broader access. His most enduring contribution came in 1700 with the founding of the Societas Regia Scientiarum Brandenburgensis (later the ) in , persuaded by Electress Sophia Charlotte and King Frederick I; Leibniz was nominated president on July 12, 1700, and the incorporated a , , and to support systematic observation and publication. He further pursued academies in (emphasizing demographic studies and production with August II), (proposing tripartite faculties for letters, , and physics to Emperor Charles VI in 1713–1714), and St. Petersburg, though several remained unrealized due to political contingencies. Leibniz also advanced library infrastructure as director of the Herzog August Library in from 1691 until his death in 1716, where he substantially augmented collections through acquisitions and exchanges while introducing the first alphabetical catalog to enhance retrieval efficiency. This system prioritized user accessibility over prior chronological or topical arrangements, aligning with his broader advocacy for centralized repositories to preserve historical and scientific records, as outlined in his 1667 and 1671 proposals. Through these endeavors, Leibniz sought to institutionalize knowledge accumulation as a foundation for technological and intellectual advancement, countering fragmented scholarship with coordinated, state-supported frameworks.

Legacy

18th-Century Reception and Voltaire's Critique

Leibniz's death on November 14, 1716, prompted immediate recognition of his breadth of contributions, as evidenced by Bernard le Bovier de Fontenelle's eulogy delivered to the Académie des Sciences in 1716, which praised his genius across mathematics, philosophy, and history while noting his relative isolation from forming a direct school of followers during his lifetime. Despite this acclaim, Leibniz's philosophical system faced initial neglect in the broader European intellectual landscape, overshadowed by the Newton-Leibniz calculus priority dispute and the rising dominance of empirical approaches, though his ideas gained traction in Germany through Christian Wolff's systematic exposition starting in the 1720s, which formalized Leibnizian rationalism and monadology into a school influencing university curricula until the mid-18th century. In , reception was more mixed, with figures like Pierre-Louis Moreau de Maupertuis incorporating select Leibnizian principles into their work on nature's economy, yet broader philosophical circles increasingly critiqued the perceived metaphysical excesses of pre-established harmony and . This culminated in 's pointed satire, where his 1759 novella , ou l'Optimisme lampooned Leibniz's from the Essais de sur la bonté de Dieu, la liberté de l'homme et l'origine du mal (1710), which argued that , in his infinite wisdom, selected this world as the optimal realization among infinite possibilities, minimizing while maximizing goods like order and variety. , responding partly to the that killed up to 100,000 people and devastated the city on , portrayed the tutor Pangloss—a of Leibniz—as absurdly insisting "all is for the best in this " amid personal and global calamities, including shipwrecks, wars, and inquisitions, to underscore the doctrine's detachment from empirical suffering. Voltaire's critique, while rhetorically effective in popularizing toward metaphysical , misrepresented Leibniz's nuanced position, which acknowledged evil's reality as a necessary contrast enabling greater goods and rejected a perfect world as incompatible with finite creatures' freedom and contingency, though it aligned with Enlightenment emphases on observable experience over a priori . By the late , Leibniz's influence waned further in with Kant's 1781 Critique of Pure Reason challenging Wolffian dogmatism derived from Leibniz, and in Britain, where empiricists like prioritized sensory data over innate ideas, yet Leibniz's logical and calculative innovations persisted in mathematical circles despite philosophical marginalization.

19th- and 20th-Century Rediscovery

In the nineteenth century, renewed scholarly attention to Leibniz's oeuvre began with the publication of key editions that made his writings more accessible beyond the limited eighteenth-century compilations. Eduard Erdmann's God. Guil. Leibnitii Opera Philosophica quae exstant Latina, Gallica, Germanica omnia (1839–1840) collected and edited his philosophical texts, sparking initial interest among German scholars and facilitating critical reassessments of his metaphysics and . Similarly, Carl Immanuel Gerhardt's multi-volume Leibnizens Mathematische Schriften (1849–1863) systematized his mathematical papers, highlighting contributions to and that had been overshadowed by Newtonian dominance. These efforts, centered in , countered the post-enlightenment dismissal of Leibniz's and , influencing Romantic thinkers who drew on his holistic view of nature and harmony. The early twentieth century accelerated this rediscovery through focused studies on Leibniz's logical innovations, previously underexplored due to incomplete manuscripts. Bertrand Russell's A Critical Exposition of the Philosophy of Leibniz (1900), originally his 1899 dissertation, rigorously analyzed Leibniz's principles of sufficient reason and while critiquing perceived inconsistencies in his metaphysics, thereby reintroducing him to Anglo-American philosophy as a foundational logician. Complementing this, Louis Couturat's La Logique de Leibniz d'après des documents inédits (1901) edited and interpreted unpublished fragments from the , revealing Leibniz's visionary "universal characteristic" and as precursors to symbolic logic. These works shifted perceptions, positioning Leibniz not merely as a historical figure but as an intellectual ancestor to modern formal systems, despite Russell's view that his logical ambitions outpaced their realization. By mid-century, institutional initiatives solidified Leibniz's stature. The initiated a comprehensive edition of his writings in 1923, building on prior efforts to catalog his vast correspondence and unpublished papers. In , his ideas gained traction for and possible worlds semantics, influencing figures like , while in , societies dedicated to his legacy promoted interdisciplinary study. The Gottfried-Wilhelm-Leibniz-Gesellschaft, founded in 1966, further advanced archival research and dissemination, underscoring his enduring relevance across , , and computer science precursors like binary arithmetic. This revival affirmed Leibniz's status as a whose integrated worldview anticipated twentieth-century developments in logic and , transcending earlier caricatures of naive optimism.

Contemporary Influence in Analytic Philosophy, Computer Science, and Beyond

Leibniz's logical innovations continue to inform analytic philosophy, particularly through his anticipation of formal systems and metaphysical principles. His proposed characteristica universalis, a universal symbolic language for reasoning, prefigured modern symbolic logic as developed by figures like Gottlob Frege and Bertrand Russell, though direct transmission to 19th-century logic was absent. The principle of sufficient reason, positing that nothing occurs without a reason, remains debated in contemporary metaphysics, challenging explanations lacking ultimate causal grounds and influencing discussions on contingency and necessity. His conception of possible worlds, wherein God selects the optimal among infinite alternatives, resonates in modal logic, with Saul Kripke's semantics for necessity and possibility drawing structural parallels, albeit via independent development. In , Leibniz's practical and theoretical contributions laid early groundwork for digital computation. His 1694 , a mechanical device using a stepped cylinder to perform addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, represented the first calculator capable of all four arithmetic operations automatically. Independently devising binary arithmetic by 1679 and publishing it in 1703, Leibniz viewed the dyadic system—built from 0 and 1—as emblematic of creation ex nihilo, enabling efficient mechanical representation of numbers and operations that underpin all contemporary digital hardware. This binary foundation facilitated the transition from analog to digital computing, with modern processors relying on binary logic gates traceable to his insights. Leibniz's visionary calculus ratiocinator, intended as a mechanical method for truth-discovery via symbolic manipulation, anticipates formal verification, automated theorem proving, and programming languages in artificial intelligence. Beyond these domains, his Monadology sustains influence in metaphysics and philosophy of mind, where monads—windowless, indivisible units pre-programmed in harmonious parallelism—parallel debates on non-interacting yet coordinated systems, such as in some process ontologies or critiques of substance dualism. In mathematics, his differential notation (e.g., dydx\frac{dy}{dx}) from the 1680s endures as the conventional tool for calculus, aiding computational simulations and engineering analyses today. These elements underscore Leibniz's enduring role in fostering interdisciplinary rigor, from logical formalism to computational universality.

Major Writings

Pre-1700 Works

Leibniz's earliest significant publication, the (1666), expanded upon his master's thesis and habilitation defense at the University of Leipzig. In this work, he proposed a combinatorial method for generating all possible combinations of concepts from a of primitives, aiming to establish a universal logical calculus or that could resolve philosophical disputes through calculation rather than verbal argumentation. Drawing from and earlier combinatorial traditions, Leibniz outlined rules for forming complex ideas and applied them to topics like jurisprudence and , foreshadowing his lifelong project of a for science and reasoning. In 1671, Leibniz published the Hypothesis physica nova, dedicated to the French Academy of Sciences, which included the Theoria motus abstracti (Theory of Abstract Motion). This treatise sought to explain natural phenomena through a mechanical philosophy emphasizing conservation laws and harmonic principles, positing that motion arises from a pre-established harmony among bodies rather than Cartesian vortices or impacts alone. Leibniz critiqued prevailing theories by introducing abstract notions of force and momentum, arguing for a dynamical approach where bodies possess inherent active principles, and he illustrated these with applications to optics, magnetism, and celestial mechanics. The work marked his shift toward a more vitalistic mechanics, integrating teleological elements into physical explanation. During the 1670s, amid travels to and , Leibniz developed foundational ideas in infinitesimal through private manuscripts and correspondence, independently of , focusing on the analysis of infinitesimals for solving geometric problems. His first public announcement came in 1684 with "Nova methodus pro maximis et minimis" in the Acta Eruditorum, where he introduced the integral sign ∫ and differential notation dy/dx to compute tangents, quadratures, and maxima/minima, applying it to problems like the brachistochrone. Subsequent papers in the same journal, such as those on infinite series in 1682 and in 1693, expanded this framework, establishing as a tool for continuous variation and laying groundwork for later analysis. By the 1690s, Leibniz's writings shifted toward dynamics and metaphysics, exemplified by the Specimen dynamicum (1695), published in two parts in the Acta Eruditorum. Here, he formalized the concept of vis viva (living force, proportional to mv²) as the true measure of motion, distinguishing it from mere quantity of motion (mv) and critiquing Cartesian conservation principles through experiments and thought experiments on elastic collisions. This work bridged his early mechanics with mature philosophy, arguing that force is primitive and substantial, not reducible to size and speed, and anticipated energy conservation. Leibniz also composed unpublished pieces like the Discourse on Metaphysics (1686), which articulated principles of sufficient reason, identity of indiscernibles, and pre-established harmony, though these circulated only in manuscript form among correspondents.

Mature Philosophical Treatises

In 1710, Leibniz published Essais de Théodicée sur la bonté de Dieu, la liberté de l'homme et l'origine du mal, his sole book-length philosophical treatise issued during his lifetime, comprising three parts that systematically defend the compatibility of evil's existence with an omnipotent, omniscient, and benevolent God. Leibniz argues that God, in creating the world from infinite possibilities, selected the optimal sequence of compatible events yielding the greatest variety amid order, rendering this the "best of all possible worlds" where apparent evils—moral, metaphysical, and physical—contribute to higher goods or prevent greater harms, such as through free will's necessity for genuine moral agency. He critiques alternative views, including occasionalism and absolute determinism, while invoking scriptural and patristic authorities alongside rational demonstrations, coining the term "theodicy" to denote justification of divine justice. Between 1703 and 1705, Leibniz composed Nouveaux essais sur l'entendement humain, a dialogue-structured critique of John Locke's empiricist in An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690), though it remained unpublished until 1765 due to Locke's recent death and Leibniz's deference. Adopting Locke's chapter-by-chapter format with Philalethes voicing Lockean views and Leibniz's own, the work refutes the doctrine by positing innate truths—necessary principles of logic, , and —accessible via reflection on internal faculties rather than solely sensory experience, as evidenced by universal assent to contradictions' impossibility and self-evident axioms. Leibniz maintains that ideas arise from perceptions but are structured by predisposed rational capacities, integrating empiricist insights with his to explain knowledge's foundations without reducing mind to passive reception. In 1714, amid declining health, Leibniz drafted two succinct summaries of his metaphysical system for distinct audiences: Principes de la nature et de la grâce, fondés en raison, addressed to , and La Monadologie, a 90-paragraph outline prepared during his stay. The Principes (18 sections) grounds physics and in rational principles, portraying substances as active forces manifesting God's wisdom through continuous creation and pre-established harmony, where souls and bodies interlink without direct causation, ensuring cosmic order via divine synchrony. Complementarily, the Monadologie posits monads as windowless, indivisible units of —simple, perceiving substances varying in clarity from bare appetition in basic entities to apperceptive intellect in minds—each mirroring the universe uniquely yet harmonized by God to simulate interaction, rejecting atomistic corpuscles for this idealistic pluralism that resolves mind-body dualism. These texts crystallize Leibniz's mature , emphasizing sufficient reason, the , and as corollaries of divine perfection, influencing subsequent continental rationalism.

Posthumous Publications and Editions

Leibniz died on November 14, 1716, leaving behind an extensive Nachlass comprising tens of thousands of manuscript pages, including unfinished treatises, draft essays, and over 15,000 letters to more than 1,100 correspondents. Much of this material remained unpublished during his lifetime, with only selective pamphlets and the 1710 Theodicy seeing print as books. Posthumous publications began soon after his death, often initiated by executors or scholarly admirers drawing from his archives in Hanover and other collections; these included early printings of mature philosophical summaries like the Monadology (composed 1714), a 90-aphorism outline of his monadic metaphysics first issued around 1720. Other significant works followed in subsequent decades. The New Essays on Human Understanding, drafted circa 1704–1705 as a point-by-point critique of John Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding, was withheld from publication during Locke's lifetime to avoid dispute and appeared only in 1765. Similarly, the Discourse on Metaphysics (1686), articulating core doctrines such as the identity of indiscernibles and sufficient reason, received its initial printing in 1846 under Johann Eduard Erdmann. Mathematical and scientific manuscripts saw sporadic releases, with limited new editions until the 19th century, reflecting the specialized nature of his calculus developments and mechanical inventions documented in unpublished notes. Systematic editions emerged in the 18th and 19th centuries to organize the growing accessibility of Leibniz's papers. Louis Dutens's Opera Omnia (1768) compiled primarily correspondence and lesser writings across six volumes, though it omitted key philosophical texts and contained editorial inaccuracies. More focused 19th-century efforts included Erdmann's two-volume philosophical writings (1839–1840) and Carl Immanuel Gerhardt's seven-volume Philosophische Schriften (1875–1890), which established textual bases for metaphysics and logic but lacked full or comprehensive inclusion of letters and sciences. The definitive scholarly project, the Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe (Complete Writings and Letters), was launched by the Prussian (later Berlin-Brandenburg) Academy of Sciences in to produce a historical-critical edition of all known works. Structured in eight series—three for correspondence (I–III) and five for writings (IV–VIII, spanning , , , and natural sciences)—it targets over 120 volumes, presenting unpublished originals with variants, indices, and annotations drawn from dispersed archives. By 2023, over 60 volumes had appeared, covering chronological sequences from Leibniz's early career onward, though completion remains projected for the mid-21st century due to the corpus's scale. This edition supersedes predecessors by prioritizing manuscript fidelity over interpretive smoothing, enabling precise study of Leibniz's evolving thought.

References

  1. https://proofwiki.org/wiki/Praeclarum_Theorema
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.