Digital Quadrivium Project by Raul Corazzon: four websites
Bibliographia. Annotated Bibliographies (www.bibliographia.co)
by Raul Corazzon
Digital Quadrivium Project by Raul Corazzon: four websites
Bibliographia: Bibliographies on Philosophy and Religiony
BibliograhiaBibliographia. Annotated Bibliographies
A.I. Chatbots on the Digital Quadrivium Project
Content of the Projected Pages
This website can also be downloaded as ebook or PDF:
Search in the four Websites:
Second Part: Anthologies (II). Works 1663-1686 (Current page)
On the website History of Logic"
Bibliography of Leibniz on Logic and Semiotics:
Strickland, Lloyd, ed. 2016. Leibniz on God and Religion: A Reader. New York: Bloomsbury.
"Religion was thus, to Leibniz, the means by which one could bring about not just peace between different groups, cultures and nations, but also peace of mind to individuals in this life, and eternal happiness in the next.
Leibniz’s Religious Views
Clearly, Leibniz’s writings on religion need to be placed in this context, and approached in the knowledge that Leibniz was committed first and foremost to practice, with theory or speculation taking a supporting role; as he indicated to one correspondent, ‘my aim has been not to pack the shops with books filled with nothing but air, but where possible to achieve something useful through them’.(36) The upshot of this is that Leibniz’s writings sometimes appear to be shaped more by pragmatic or prudential considerations than by personal conviction. It has been suggested (for example) that Leibniz’s interest in the Eucharist was motivated not by personal curiosity, but by his viewing it as a puzzle whose solution would satisfy others and – more importantly – contribute towards religious harmony in Europe.(37) His attempts to work out a satisfactory metaphysics of the resurrection of the same body seem similarly motivated, not least because in his essay devoted to the topic, Leibniz states quite bluntly that there are no scriptural grounds to believe that it will be the same body that is resurrected.(38) The solution he goes on to offer, therefore, is not necessarily one that he would personally endorse; instead, it is for those who do believe in the resurrection of the same body." (Introduction: Leibniz – Theology and Practice, pp. 8-9)
(36) A [= Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe] 1 (2nd edn), pp. 136–7.
(37) C. Wilson, Leibniz’s Metaphysics (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1989), p. 301. See also U. Goldenbaum, ‘Spinoza’s Parrot, Socinian Syllogisms, and Leibniz’s Metaphysics: Leibniz’s Three Strategies of Defending Christian Mysteries’, American Catholic Philosophical Quarterly 76 (2002): 556–7.
(38) See pp. 305–6.
Contents: Acknowledgements XI; Abbreviations XII; Introduction: Leibniz – Theology and Practice 1; About the Texts and Translations 13; Recommended Further Reading 15;
1 The Catholic Demonstrations 21
1. Sketch of Catholic Demonstrations (1668–9 (?)) 21; 2. On transubstantiation (1668–9 (?)) 35; 3. On the demonstration of the possibility of the mysteries of the Eucharist (autumn 1671 (?)) 42: 4. A proposal to revive the Catholic Demonstrations (late 1679 (?)) 47;
2 The Existence and Nature of God 53
(A) The Existence of God 53
1. A proof of the existence of God from his essence (January 1678) 53; 2. There is only a single God (1685–6 (?)) 61; 3. If a necessary being is possible, it follows that it exists (March 1689–March 1690 (?)) 63; 4. God is the sufficient reason for the world (29 December 1692) 8 January 1693) 64; 5. On Reverend Father Lamy’s demonstration of the existence of God (late June 1701) 66;
(B) The Nature of God 69
1. God is not the soul of the world (summer 1683–winter 1685/6 (?)) 69; 2. Rationale of the Catholic faith (mid-1680s (?)) 70; 3. On the true Mystical Theology (mid-1690s (?)) 79; 4. Review of Lüttichau’s Pansophia (4 September 1696) 84; 5. Ancient and modern understandings of God (30 April 1709) 90;
3 Reason and Faith 93
1. What needs to be done to defend the Christian religion; (10/20 February 1670) 93; 2. On the Treatise of Religion against the Atheists (1677–9 (?)) 94; 3. Dialogue between a theologian and a misosophist (2nd half 1678–1st half 1679 (?)) 96; 4. Specimen of Catholic Demonstrations, or, Apology for the faith through reason (July 1683–March 1686 (?)) 103; 5. An outline of a natural theology (29 September/9 October 1697) 108; 6. The use of reason in theology (6 October 1706) 110; 7. On the Greeks as the founders of a sacred philosophy (1 July 1714) 113;
4 Ethics and the Love of God 121
1. Letter concerning Steno and Spinoza (March 1677 (?)) 121; 2. Dialogue between Theophile and Polidore (summer–autumn 1679 (?)) 127; 3. Aphorisms concerning happiness, wisdom, charity and justice (summer–winter 1678/9 (?)) 137; 4. Dialogue between Poliander and Theophile (mid-1679 (?)) 141; 5. Critical remarks on William Penn and the Quakers (March 1696) 148; 6. The true theology (10/20 December 1696) 153; 7. On the disinterested love of God (9/19 (?) August 1697) 157; 8. On the public good (2/12 February 1700) 162; 9. The essence of piety (18 March 1705) 163;
5 The Bible 165
1. Short commentary on the judge of controversies, or, The balance of reason and the textual norm (1669–71 (?)) 165; 2. Brief explanation of Revelation (January 1677) 174; 3. On the Revelation of St John (30 June/10 July 1691) 186; 4. The story of Bileam (early September 1706) 187;
Miracles and Mysteries 195
1. The devil cannot prophesize (3 March 1680) 195; 2. On the threefold God (1680–4 (?)) 196; 3. On the person of Christ (1680–4 (?)) 199; 4. On the Trinity (autumn 1685 (?)) 202; 5. Some thoughts on the Trinity, occasioned by the reading of Stephen Nye’s Considerations on the Explications of the Doctrine of the Trinity (1693–end 1695) 203; 6. On miracles and mysteries (August–September (?) 1697) 209; 7. Hasty comments on the book Christianity not Mysterious, written 8 August 1701 210;
7 The Churches and their Doctrines 225
1. On the host (October 1677) 225; 2. On Scripture, the Church and the Trinity (1680–4 (?)) 227; 3. On God and the Church (autumn 1685–spring 1686 (?)) 232; 4. Suppositions (autumn 1685–spring 1686 (?)) 236;
5. On the certainty of salvation (17/27 March 1695) 239; 6. On the authority of the Pope (1705) 241; 7. Exposition of the doctrines and practices authorized by the Roman Church (1705 (?)) 244;
8 Grace and Predestination 253
1. On freedom, fate and God’s grace (spring–winter 1686/7 (?)) 253; 9 Sin, Evil and Theodicy 271; 1. The author of sin (1673 (?)) 271; 2. On the goodness of God’s works (autumn 1684 (?)) 273; 3. Genuine dialogue (25 January 1695) 274; 4. Can the bad outcomes of wicked actions be ascribed to wickedness? (after 1695 (?)) 282; 5. On God and man (December 1705 (?)) 286; 6. On the composition of a stirring theological poem, ‘Uranius’ (3 September 1711) 299;
10 The Afterlife 303
(A) Resurrection and Purgatory 303
1. On the resurrection of bodies (21 May 1671) 303; 2. On purgatory (January 1677) 308; 3. St Augustine’s opinion on purgatory (6/16 December 1694) 311; 4. On the time of purification (not later than spring 1698) 315; 5. Whether purgatory is an article of faith (4/14 January and 2/12 February 1700) 316; 6. On the valley of Jehoshaphat (1715 (?)) 318;
(B) Salvation and Damnation 319
1. On the damnation of the innocent (4/14 September 1690) 319; 2. On the imagination of the future life (not later than spring 1698) 320; 3. On the salvation of pagans (not later than spring 1698) 323; 4. Blessedness and punishment (21 February 1705) 324; 5. Preface to Ernst Soner’s book on eternal punishment (1708) 325;
11 Non-Christian Religions 327
1. On a small book entitled Seder Olam (1694) 327; 2. On the Jesuit mission in China (18 January 1700) 332; 3. On an intellectual exchange with the Chinese (18 August 1705) 334; 4. On the Mohammedans and Socinians (2 December 1706) 337;
Index 345-350.
Strickland, Lloyd, and Lewis, Harry. 2022. Leibniz on Binary: The Invention of Computer Arithmetic. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
"For each text, we have provided full details of the manuscript sources and available transcriptions, as well as a "'headnote" in which we explain the context and content of the text as well as give reasons for our dating of the manuscript source in the many cases where Leibniz did not date the text himself.
It should be noted that those texts written before March 1700 are given two dates: the first follows the Julian calendar. the second the Gregorian calendar. which was finally adopted in Protestant Germany on 1 March 1700. Until the switch, Leibniz dated his writings according to the Julian calendar, which was ten days behind the Gregorian. Although we have not amended any of the dates Leibniz supplied on his manuscripts we have followed the convention of using a dual-dating system. consisting of old and new-style dates. when referring to dates falling before the switch to the Gregorian calendar, for example, writing a date as 15/25 March, where the first date is that of the Julian calendar (old style) and the second that of the modem Gregorian calendar (new style).
In addition to the headnotes and footnotes, we have also supplied commentaries to explain Leibniz's thinking and/or to identify his errors and how this affect his calculalions. These commentaries are displayed against a gray background and are positioned alongside or underneath the relevant pan of a text: the gray box indicates that the comments within are not part of the text proper but are an editorial comment thereon." (Introduction, p. 24)
Contents: List of Figures IX; Abbreviations X; Preface XI; Acknowledgments XIII; Introduction 1;
1 Notes on Algebra, Arithmetic, and Geometric Series (October 1674) 27; 2 The Series of All Numbers, and on Binary Progression (before 15/25 March 1679) 31; 3 Binary Progression (before 15/25 March 1679) 35; 4 Geometric Progressions and Positional Notation (before 15/25 March 1679) 41; 5 Binary Arithmetic Machine (before 15/25 March 1679) 45; 6 On the Binary Progression (15/25 March 1679) 47; 7 Attempted Expression of the Circle in Binary Progression (c. 1679) 61; 8 Sedeclmal Progression (1679) 63; 9 Binary Progression Is for Theory, Sedeclmal for Practice (c. 1679) 69; 10 On the Organon or Great Art of Thinking (first half [?) of 1679) 71; 11 Binary Ancestral Calculations (early 1680s [?)) 75; 12 Sedeclmal on an Envelope (c. 1682-1685) 77; 13 Remarks on Weigel (1694 mid-March 1695) 79; 14 Leibniz to Duke Rudolph August (7/17-8/18 May 1696) 87; 15 A Wonderful Expression of All Numbers by 1 and 0 Representing the Origin of Things from God and Nothing, or the Mystery of Creation (7/17 May 1696) 89; 16 Wonderful Origin of All Numbers from 1 and 0, Which Serves as a Beautiful Representation of the Mystery of Creation, since Everything Arises from God and Nothing Else (8/18 May 1696) 93; 17 Leibniz to Duke Rudolph August (2/12 January 1697) 99; 18 Duke Rudolph August to Johann Urban Muller (5/15 January 1697) 105; 19 Leibniz to Claudio Fillppo Grimaldi (mid-January early February 1697) 107; 20 Periods (May 1698-flrst half of January 1701) 117; 21 Leibniz to Philippe Naudé (15 January 1701) 121; 22 Leibniz to Joachim Bouvet (15 February 1701) 125; 23 Essay on a New Science of Numbers (26 February 1701) 135; 24 Binary Addition (spring-summer 1701 [?]) 145; 25 Periods in Binary (spring-fall 1701) 149; 26 Periods and Powers (mid-to-late June 1701 [?)) 151; 27 Demonstration That Columns of Sequences Exhibiting Powers of Arithmetic Progressions, or Numbers Composed from These, Are Periodic (November 1701) 157; 28 Joachim Bouvet to Leibniz (4 November 1701); 29 Leibniz to Bouvet (early April [?] 1703); 30 Explanation of Binary Arithmetic, Which Uses Only the Digits 0 and 1, with Some Remarks on his Usefulness, and on the Light it Throws on the Ancient Chinese Figures of Fuxi (7 April 1703) 189; 31 Leibniz to Cesar Caze (23 June 1705); 32 On Binary (late June 1705);
Bibliography 213; Index 225-226.
Arthur, Richard T. W., ed. 2023. Leibniz: Journal Articles on Natural Philosophy. New York Oxford University Press.
"In conclusion, it is hoped that this selection of Leibniz's published articles gives a fair representation of his efforts and accomplishments in natural philosophy, and how they were received in his time. As such, it should help to redress the balance in favour of his published work, despite the treasures that are still being unearthed from the archives. As we have witnessed, Leibniz was keen on sharing his views with his contemporaries in an effort to advance knowledge. Indeed, one could say that he regarded cooperative work of this kind as more important than the publishing of monographs, thus giving added significance to selections of his published articles such as this one. The fact that he published over a hundred journal articles is a testament to this desire for the promotion of knowledge, and should be borne in mind whenever it is charged that Leibniz 'published so little in his lifetime', as is often said." (Introduction, p. 37)
Contents: Preface IX; Abbreviations XI, Note on Texts and Translation XIII; Some Notes on Seventeenth-century Mathematics XV-XVII;
Introduction 1
1. A Unitary Principle of Optics, Catoptrics, and Dioptrics: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, June 1682 38; 2. New Demonstrations Concerning the Resistance of Solids: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, July 1684 46; 3. A Brief Demonstration of a Notable Error by Descartes and others concerning a Law of Nature according to which they maintain that God always conserves the same Quantity of Motion in matter, a law which they also misuse in mechanics: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, March 1686 56; 4. A Brief Comment by the Abbé D. C., showing Mr G. G. Leibniz the paralogism contained in the preceding objection: François Abbé de Catelan, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, September 1686 61; 5. A Reply by Mr L. to the Abbé D. C., contained in a letter written to the Editor of these Nouvelles on 9th January 1687, concerning what was said by Mr Descartes: that God always conserves in nature the same quantity of motion: G. W. Leibniz, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, February 1687 64; 6. Comment by the Abbé D. C. on Mr L.'s Reply with regard to Mr Descartes's principle of mechanics; in Article 3 of these Nouvelles, February 1687: François Abbé de Catelan, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, June 1687 71; 7. Response by Mr L. to the Comment by the Abbé D. C. in Article 1 of these Nouvelles for the month of June 1687, in which he attempts to defend a Law of Nature proposed by Mr Descartes: G. W. Leibniz, Nouvelles de la République des Lettres, September 1687 78; 8. On Optical Lines and other matters: Excerpts from a letter to - -. G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, January 1689 81; 9. A Sketch Concerning the Resistance of a Medium and the motion of heavy bodies projected in a resisting medium: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, January 1689 85; 10. An Essay on the Causes of the Celestial Motions: Acta eruditorum, February 1689 95; 11. Observations on the Cause of Gravity and its Properties: Denis Papin, Acta eruditorum, April 1689 112; 12. On the Isochronous Line along which a heavy body descends without acceleration, and on the controversy with the Abbé D. C.: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, April 1689 118; 13. On the Cause of Gravity, and defence against the Cartesians of the author's own view on the true laws of nature: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, May 1690 123; 14. A Reply to the articles that the illustrious J. B. published in the May issue of these Acta: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, July 1690 135; 15. An Opinion about the Motive Forces of Mechanics, offered by D. Papin against the objections of the most distinguished G. G. L.: Denis Papin, Acta eruditorum, January 1691 138; 16. Addition to the Sketch on the Resistance of the Medium published in these Acta in February 1689: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, April 1691 147; 17. On the Line into which a flexible body curves itself under its own weight, and its remarkable usefulness for discovering any number of mean proportionals and logarithms: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, June 1691 149; 18. On Solutions to the Problem of the Catenary or Funicular, and to other problems proposed by the learned I. B. in the Acta of June 1691: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, September 1691 156; 19. On the Laws of Nature and true estimation of motive forces, against the Cartesians: a Reply to the arguments proposed by Mr P. last January in these Acta, p. 6: G. W. Leibniz, Acta Eruditorum, September 1691 162; 20. General Rule for the Composition of Motions: G. W. Leibniz, Journal des Sçavans, September 1693 171; 21. Two Problems Constructed by Mr Leibniz, employing the general rule of the composition of motions that he just published: G. W. Leibniz, Journal des Sçavans, September 1693 174; 22. A Specimen of Dynamics for the disclosing of the admirable laws of nature concerning the forces of bodies and their mutual actions, and reducing them to their causes: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, April 1695 176; 23. A Short Note on p. 537ff. of the December Acta of 1695: G. W. Leibniz, Acta eruditorum, March 1696 191; 24. An Excerpt from a Letter of G. G. L. that he wrote to a friend in favour of his physical hypothesis about the motions of the planets, once inserted in these Acta (Febr. 1689): Acta eruditorum, October 1706 195; 25. Letters from Baron von Leibniz to Mr Hartsoeker, with the replies of Mr Hartsoeker: G. W. Leibniz and Nicolaas Hartsoeker, Mémoires de Trevoux, March 1712 201; 26. Letter from Baron von Leibniz to Mr Hartsoeker, 12 July 1711: G. W. Leibniz, Mémoires de Trevoux, April 1712 214;
Bibliography 217; Index of Names 225; Subject Index 228-230.
Lodge, Paul, ed. 2025. Leibniz: Journal Articles on Philosophy. New York Oxford University Press.
"This volume of the philosophical papers published by Leibniz during his lifetime has been many years in the making. It has its origins in discussions with Thoemmes Press in the early 2000s regarding the possibility of publishing all of Leibniz's philosophical publications in the original language. However, this project came to an end once I discovered that Antonio Lamarra and Roberto Palaia were already editing an even more comprehensive volume for Georg Olms, which emerged in 2005 as G. W. Leibniz: Essais scientifiques et philosophiques (ESP).
With the publication of this volume my mind turned instead to the idea of a volume of translations. I had initially conceived of this as a project which would cover all of the articles published by Leibniz in his lifetime on philosophy, including a number of pieces that might more appropriately by regarded as works of natural philosophy. I was fortunate to have the support of Peter Momtchiloff at OUP and work began." (Preface, p. XI)
"Although the volume carries the title Leibniz: Journal Articles on Philosophy, the term 'philosophical' is of course one whose meaning is readily contested.
However, the papers can be easily contrasted with those which Leibniz published on mathematics and those in which he reported on matters connected with his research into the history of the House of Guelph.(1) The distinction between the papers Leibniz published in philosophy and those which would have been regarded as 'natural philosophy' has a less clear-cut boundary. The term 'natural philosophy' is roughly equivalent to the contemporary term 'natural science' and it is with this in mind that the selection of papers was made. However, it was also a function of the fact that the present volume was conceived alongside a companion volume, edited by Richard Arthur, Leibniz: Journal Articles on Natural Philosophy (JANP); and all the articles that are plausible candidates for the label 'philosophical' can be found in one or the other." (Introduction, p. 1, a note omitted)
(1) See Antognazza 2018 for details of Leibniz's activities as an historian.
References
Antognazza, Maria Rosa (2018). 'Leibniz as Historian, in Maria Rosa Antognazza (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Leibniz (Oxford: Oxford University Press), 591-608.
Contents: Preface XI; Abbreviations XIII; Note on Texts and Translations XV;
Introduction 1; 1. Descartes and the Cartesians 3; 2. The 'New System' and its Three 'Explanations' 10; 3. The Responses to Pierre Bayle's Critique of the 'New System' 15; 4. Responses to Other Critics of the 'New System' 21; 5. Responses to Simon Foucher 24; 6. Miscellaneous Essays on Metaphysics 25; 7. Book Reviews 33; 8. Miscellaneous Short Pieces 40;
1. Meditations on Knowledge, Truth, and Ideas by G. G. L: Acta Eruditorum, November 1684, 537-42 42; 2. Extract from a Letter from Mr L. Concerning a General Principle of Use in the Explanation of the Laws of Nature by Consideration of Divine Wisdom; To Serve as a Response to the Reply by the Revd Fr M.: Nouvelles de la Republique des Lettres, July 1687, 744-53 48; 3. G. G. L. On Combinatorial Art. Frankfurt: H. C. Crokerum, 1690 in Quarto, pp. 11: Acta Eruditorum, February 1691, 63-4 52; 4. Extract from a Letter from Mr Leibniz on the Question of Whether the Essence of Body Consists in Extension: Journal des Sçavans, 18 June 1691, 259-62 54; 5. Extract from a Letter by Mr Leibniz to Mr Foucher, Canon of Dijon, on Some Axioms of Philosophy: Journal des Sçavans, 2 June 1692, 247-9 57; 6. Extract from a Letter from Mr Leibniz in Support of his Contribution to the Journal des Sçavans for 18 June 1691: Journal des Sçavans, 5 January 1693, 9-10 60; 7. Extract from a Letter from Mr Leibniz to the Abbé Nicaise on Mr Descartes's Philosophy: Journal des Sçavans, 13 April 1693, 240-3 62; 8. Mr Leibniz's Reply to the Extract from the Letter by Mr Foucher, Canon of Dijon, which Appeared in the Journal of 16 March 1693: Journal des Sçavans, 3 August 1693, 355-6 64; 9. Some Notes by G. G. L. on the Life and Doctrine of Descartes: Historia Sapientiae et Stultitiae, June 1693, 113-22 66; 10. On the Emendation of First Philosophy, and on the Notion of Substance: Acta Eruditorum, March 1694, 110-12 71; 11. New System of the Nature of Substances and their Communication, and of the Union which Exists between the Soul and the Body. By Mr D. L.: Journal des Sçavans, 27 June 1695, 294-300; 4 July 1695, 301-6 74; 12. Extracts From Different Letters: Histoire des Ouvrages des Savants, February 1696, article 14, 274-6 83; 13. Explanation of the New System of the Communication between Substances, in Reply to What was Said of it in the Journal for 12 September 1695: Journal des Sçavans, 2 April 1696, 166-8; 9 April 1696, 169-71 85; 14. Pansophia oder Grund aller Weisheit in Erkäntnŭss Gottes nach seinen Wesen vermittelst der Vernunffts-Kräffte gesuchet von W.H.V.L. that is to say Pansophia, or the Foundation of All Wisdom, Consisting in the Knowledge of God, through His Essence; And in the Knowledge of Man, through His Nature: All Investigated by the Light of Reason. By Mr de Lŭttichau. (Berlin, Michel Rudiger, in octavo, 1696): Nouveau Journal des Sçavans, September/October 1696, 397-407 90; 15. Extract from a Letter from Mr Leibniz about his Philosophical Hypothesis, and about an Interesting Problem for Mathematicians Set by One of his Friends; With a Comment on Some Points Debated in Previous Journals by the Author of the Principles of Physics and That of the Objections to Those Principles: Journal des Sçavans, November 1696, 451-5 95; 16. Reply to the Reflections Appearing in the 23rd Volume of This Year's Journal des Sçavans, Concerning the Consequences of Some Points in Descartes's philosophy: Journal des Sçavans, 26 August 1697, 381-4 99; 17. Continuation of the Reply to the Reflections on the Consequences of Some Points in Descartes's Philosophy: Journal des Sçavans, 26 August 1697, 385-8 103; 18. A Letter from Mr Leibniz to the Editor, Containing a Clarification of the Difficulties which Mr Bayle Found with the New System of the Union of the Soul and Body: Histoire des Ouvrages des Savans, July 1698, 329-42 106; 19. G. G. L. On Nature Itself, that is, the Inherent Force and Actions of Created Things, Toward Confirming and Illustrating their Dynamics: Acta Eruditorum, September 1698, 427-40 113; 20. Extract from a Letter of Mr Leibniz on What There is in the Mémoires of January and February Touching on the Generation of Ice and the Cartesian Demonstration of the Existence of God by the Benedictine Revd Fr Lamy: Mémoires pour l'Histoire des Sciences et des Beaux Arts, September-October 1701, 200-7 126; 21. Extract from a Letter from Mr Leibniz to Mr Varignon, Containing a Clarification of What was Said of him in the Mémoires de Trevoux for Last November and December: Journal des Sçavans, 20 March 1702, 183-6 129; 22. Considerations Concerning Vital Principles and Plastic Natures, by the Originator of the System of Pre-Established Harmony: Histoire des Ouvrages des Savans, May 1705, 222-36 132; 23. Remark by Mr Leibniz on an Article in the Mémoires de Trevoux from the Month of March 1704: Mémoires pour l'Histoire des Sciences et des Beaux Arts, March 1708, 488-91 140; 24. Reply to the Objections that the Author of the Book The Knowledge of the Self Made Against the System of Pre-Established Harmony: Supplement to the Journal des Sçavans of the last day of June 1709, 275-81 142; 25. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz's Letter Concerning the Principles of Pufendorf's Work On the Duty of Man and Citizen: Neuer Bucher-Saal, 1711, 837-52; 26. Mr Leibniz's Remarks on the Sixth Philosophical Letter Published at Trevoux in 1703: Memoires pour l'Histoire des Sciences et des Beaux Arts, July 1712, 1235-40 157; 27. A Critical Eulogy on the Works of Lord Shaftesbury, by Mr Leibniz. Submitted by Mr Coste: Histoire Critique de la République des Lettres, Tant Ancienne que Modern, 1715, volume 10, article 10, 161; 28. Clarification of an Item in the Last Journal. Pages 128 and 129: Journal Litteraire, 1715, 510-11 169; 29. Letter from Mr Leibniz to Mr Des Maizeaux, Containing Some Clarifications of the Preceding Explanation, and of Other Parts of the System of Pre-Established Harmony, Etc. Hanover, 8 July 1711: Histoire Critique de la République des Lettres, Tant Ancienne que Modern, 1716, volume 11, article 3, 72-8 170; 30. Mr Leibniz's Reply to the Comments Contained in the Second Edition of Mr Bayle's Critical Dictionary, in the Article 'Rorarius: Concerning the System of Pre-Established Harmony: Histoire Critique de la République des Lettres, Tant Ancienne que Modern, 1716, volume 11, article 4, 78-114 173;
Biographies of Figures Mentioned 189; Bibliography 199; Index of Names 207; Subject Index 210-216.
Arthur, Richard T. W., and Ottaviani, Osvaldo, eds. 2025. Leibniz: Writings on the Metaphysics of the Infinite. New York Oxford University Press.
"In the 1690s Leibniz was engaged in promulgating his thought on the infinite in both its mathematical and its philosophical aspects.
(...)
The selection of papers we are presenting here should therefore be of great interest, since it contains material relevant to both projects, as well as throwing light on their interrelation. It consists of twelve texts written by Leibniz in the 1690s and early 1700s, none of which has appeared before in English translation.
Ten of these are translations from new transcriptions we have made from original Latin manuscripts in the Leibniz Archives in Hanover (plus the texts given in Appendices 2 and 4); the remaining two are selections from Leibniz's correspondence with Johann Bernoulli (1667-1748), and excerpts from his written interchange with Gabriel Wagner (1660-1717?), both translated from the Latin text of the Academy edition (edited in A III 7 and A II 3 respectively). For each of the selected papers we have written a detailed commentary explaining its significance for understanding Leibniz's thought, including substantial quotations from related sources and situating the text in relation to other writings in the Leibnizian corpus." (Introduction, pp, XIII-XIV)
Contents: List of Abbreviations IX; Editorial Note XI; Introduction XIII;
1. On the Infinite [De infinito] 2; Commentary 12; 2. An Infinite Straight Line Is Not a Whole [Lineam rectam infinitam non posse intelligi velut totum] 24; Commentary 26; 3. Reflections on Froidmont's Labyrinthus [Excerpta et Notae-Fromondus, Labyrinthus] 32; Appendix 1: Selected Passages from Froidmont's Labyrinthus 64; Commentary 81; 4. Line and Time [Linea et tempus] 104; Commentary 106; 5. Is There a Midpoint in the Infinite? [Quaeritur an in infinito detur medium] 110; Commentary 114; 6. Every Thing Resists the Infinite [Omnis res infinito resistit] 118; Commentary 120; 7. On the Incredible Subtlety of Things [De incredibili rerum subtilitate] 122; Commentary 124; 8. It is as if We Are Suspended between Two Infinities [Inter duo infinita velut suspensi sumus] 142; Commentary 144; 9. Towards a Science of the Infinite [Ad scientiam infiniti] 148; Commentary 170; Appendix 2: De scientia infiniti: Historical Preface [De scientia infiniti, prefatio] 196; 10. Selected Passages from Leibniz's Exchange with Gabriel Wagner 210; Commentary 234; 11. Selected Passages from Leibniz's Exchange with Johann Bernoulli 251; Commentary 265; 12. Place and Time, Matter and Change [Locus et tempus sunt continua ... ] 272; Commentary 278; Appendix 3: Selected Passages from Letters to Burchard de Volder and Electress Sophie 291; Appendix 4: Selected Passage from "Even though Nothing in Nature Happens by a Leap ... " 295;
Bibliography 297; Name Index 307; Subject Index 309-311.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 2025. Metaphysical Disputation on the Principle of Individuation: Daedalus Classics.
Translation, Afterword and scholarly apparatus by Shem Waters. (1663)
"Metaphysical Disputation on the Individual
Leibniz's Disputatio Metaphysica de Principio Individui (1663), written at the precocious age of 17, represents an early foray into one of the most enduring metaphysical questions: the principle of individuation. In this work, Leibniz asks how individual entities can be distinguished within the broader fabric of existence. He draws on scholasticism, particularly the Aristotelian and Thomistic traditions, to explore whether the differentiation of individuals arises from intrinsic properties, relational contexts, or metaphysical constructs. The dissertation reflects his efforts to reconcile classical metaphysics with emerging notions of substance and lays the groundwork for his later development of monadology.
The central issue addressed in the Disputatio is the ontological basis of individuality, framed through the dual lens of metaphysical essence and logical categorization. Leibniz distinguishes between principium essendi (the principle of being) and principium cognoscendi (the principle of knowing), examining how individuals are identified in reality versus how they are conceptualized in the mind. This duality anticipates his later views on the harmony between metaphysical truths and epistemological frameworks. Here he navigates the scholastic debates about whether individuation lies in matter, form, or some interplay of the two, ultimately proposing a nuanced, proto-relational account.
The Disputatio also illustrates Leibniz's burgeoning interest in the relationship between individuality and divine order. He argues that the ultimate principle of individuation must be rooted in the divine intellect, since God uniquely apprehends each individual in his distinctiveness. This theological dimension imbues the work with a teleological perspective that positions individuality not merely as a structural property of the world, but as integral to the rational harmony of creation. This theological grounding is consistent with emerging ideas of preestablished harmony and the best of all possible worlds."
Artosi, Alberto, Pieri, Bernardo, and Sartor, Giovanni, eds. 2014. Leibniz: Logico-Philosophical Puzzles in the Law: Philosophical Questions and Perplexing Cases in the Law. Dordrecht: Springer.
"We will not comment here on the specific issues addressed in the two works, since we have included extensive comments introducing each section of our translations. These comments we have provided to make Leibniz’s reasoning more accessible to the contemporary reader, who might have some difficulty extracting our young lawyer-philosopher’s subtle analyses from his writings, cast in the style of the legal and philosophical commentaries of the time. But we believe that these puzzles should be considered not merely as an object of philologico-historical interest, but also and especially as living examples of legal-philosophical reasoning, whose understanding requires an active engagement, rewarded by the intellectual enjoyment of following the processes of Leibniz’s brilliant mind." (Foreword,, p. IX)
Contents: Abbreviations XI; Introduction XIII-XXXVI; 1. Specimen of Philosophical Questions Collected from the Law [1664] 1; Annex 1.A Texts from the Digest cited in the Specimen: A Selection 47; Annex 1.B The Original Latin Text of the Specimen 49;
2. Inaugural Dissertation on Perplexing Cases in the Law [1666] 71; Annex 2.A Texts from the Digest cited in the Dissertation: A Selection 124; Annex 2.B The Original Latin Text of the Dissertation 132; Bio-bibliographical Note 151; References 195; An Essay by S. Brewer: Law, Logic, and Leibniz. A Contemporary Perspective 199; References 225-226.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 2020. Leibniz: Dissertation on Combinatorial Art. New York: Oxford University Press.
Translated with introduction and commentary by Massimo Mugnai, Han van Ruler, and Martin Wilson. (1666)
"Although studies by such eminent Leibniz specialists as Louis Couturat (1868-1914), Karl Durr (1875-1928), and Eberhard Knobloch have added much to the interpretation of Leibniz’s first publication in print, a critical edition of the Dissertatio has thus far been wanting, no doubt due to its arduous phrasing, its wide-ranging subject matter, as well as its complex overall theme.
All of these factors make Leibniz’s De arte combinatoria (henceforth DAC) a text that is not easy to edit. Working on the present edition, moreover, the editors came across many further obscurities complicating an annotated rendition of the work. Its mix of languages and subject matters is only a minor hurdle in comparison to the strenuous way in which Leibniz at times gives expression to the ideas contained in it, which, for instance, may include descriptions in Latin of complex mathematical operations. Another problem encountered was to find the many texts by authors cited in the DAC, a difficulty that was enhanced by Leibniz’s recurrent habit of quoting authors indirectly—and on occasion incorrectly." (Preface, p. 5)
(...)
"Thus, the annotated translation that lies before you is the product of a collective enterprise in which Martin Wilson has been the principal translator of Leibniz’s text. Massimo Mugnai and Han van Ruler have revised and edited the translation to produce the text as it now stands, and jointly contributed to its annotation. Han has taken care of the largest part of the footnotes, whereas Massimo, besides preparing the Latin version of the DAC here included, has provided the main text with an Introduction, aiming to situate in its historical context this early work of Leibniz and to present the main results contained in it." (Preface, p. 6)
Johns, Christopher. 2013. "Appendix: Translation of Nova Methodus Discendae Docendaeque Jurisprudentiae." In The Science of Right in Leibniz’s Moral and Political Philosophy, 149–163. New York: Bloomsbury Academic.
Translation of §§ 1 to 22 and from 69 to 76.
"A word about methodology and translation. Due to the relatively unsystematic nature as well as sheer volume of Leibniz’s works, translated as well as untranslated, scholars are especially challenged to construct a definitive or comprehensive understanding of Leibniz’s positions. For example, several scholars have attempted to accommodate Leibniz’s three degrees of right within a scheme of metaphysical perfection, or they have characterized them as voluntaristic commands or as based on egoistic motives. However, it is not possible to understand their meaning and ground without taking into account the whole argument of the New Method and especially without understanding their derivation from the moral qualities of right and obligation. The same is true of Leibniz’s Elements of Natural Right. While only one draft of the manuscript has received much attention due to its English translation, it must be understood as part of a development that includes not only the other drafts but primarily the New Method. Otherwise, one will miss Leibniz’s effort to complement his deontic foundation with his account of practical love. In an effort to avoid such misunderstandings, my method is to examine the arguments within whole texts very closely, and to understand them within their philosophical and historical context—rather than to construct an argument from various short passages taken out of context. I also pay particularly close attention to translations, since in some cases they have been misleading.
In this methodological light, this book offers the first English translation of the most important text, the didactic and polemical sections of Nova Methodus Discendae Docendaeque Jurisprudentiae (New Method of Learning and Teaching Jurisprudence).
Very little of these sections has ever been translated into English, yet they contain by far the most important passages for understanding Leibniz’s jurisprudence, especially §§13–9 (see appendix). In Chapter 2, portions of Elementa Juris Naturalis, with exception of the Loemker portions, are also translated here for the first time. While admittedly this is not exactly whole text methodology, I provide all of the relevant
passages, abstracted from otherwise extremely obscure historical details and tedious technical minutiae. I endeavor to remain as literal as possible, without straining too much the conventions of English style and sense. At least, that is my hope. I was also very much aided by Hubertus Busche’s masterful Latin-German edition of the Nova Methodus and Elementa." (Introduction, pp. XI-XII)
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 2017. The New Method of Learning and Teaching Jurisprudence According to the Principles of the Didactic Art Premised in the General Part and in the Light of Experience. Clark, New Jersey: Talbot Publishing.
Translation and notes by Carmelo Massimo de Iuliis. Preface by William E. Butler.
"Few individuals with Leibniz's range of interests were as accomplished in law and diplomacy. The present work on jurisprudence attracted the attention of Prince-Bishop Johann Philipp von Schônborn (1605-1673), Elector of Mainz, among the most influential personalities in the Holy Roman Empire. Following several years in service to the Elector, Leibniz traveled to Paris, where he remained until 1676, with a side visit to London, where he was elected to the Royal Society in 1673. Unsuccessful in obtaining diplomatic assignments to which he aspired, Leibniz removed to the electorate of Hanover, where he remained for the rest of his life. As a recognized historian, librarian, and judge and sometime traveler about Europe, he dedicated himself to a number of causes, not least the reunification of Christendom. Among his services to the science of law was his compilation and publication of the Codex Juris Gentium (1693), an enduring contribution to the law of treaties and evidence of State practice.
The present translation of Leibniz by Carmelo Massimo de luliis makes available at long last the full text of one of Leibniz’s key early works, a work that launched Leibniz towards becoming “... one of the half-dozen greatest philosophers of the seventeenth century”.(1) Composed at the age of twenty-one while journeying about Germany without a library at hand, this volume addressed universal jurisprudence as an object of learning and recommended that law be approached from four perspectives: didactic, historical, exegetic, and polemical. For each approach he suggested what materials should be studied and how they should be used." (Preface, pp. VIII-IX)
(1) Patrick Riley, Leibniz’ Universal Jurisprudence: Justice as the Charity of the Wise (1996), p. 11.
———. 2024. Model of Certainty or Demonstrations in Law Expounded in the Doctrine of Conditions. Clark, NJ: The Lawbook Exchange.
Introductory essay, translation and note by Carmelo Massimo de Iuliis.
"First published in 1669, The Doctrine of Conditions (Doctrina Conditionum) is a unique, unprecedented collection of Roman and canon law rules regarding the application of conditions in contract, inheritance and marriage law. Leibniz not only gathers these norms, scattered in a disordered way throughout the law of Justinian and the Roman pontiffs, but also derives from them 70 theorems that structure the entire field of conditional law. His work remains valuable for its attempt to distill these norms into dogmatic principles and as a perfect monographic course on the Roman law of conditions. It is published here in its first complete English translation. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz [1646-1716] is best known as a philosopher and mathematician, but he was also a distinguished jurist. Among his most significant legal works are De Casibus Perplexis in Jure (1666), a review of celebrated complex cases in Roman law, Nova Methodus Discendae Docendaeque Jurisprudentiae (1667), which not only provides didactic guidance on the teaching of law but also includes one of the first brilliant systematic reconstructions of the law concerning attorneys, and Doctrina Conditionum (1669), an attempt to axiomatize the ius commune of conditions in law. He also contributed to international law by drafting the Codex Juris Diplomaticus (1693-1700), a collection of treaties and other materials relating to the diplomatic history of the Guelph states that addressed problems related to sovereignty, diplomacy and the precedence of states within the Holy Roman Empire."
Goldenbaum, Ursula. 2008. "Leibniz’ Marginalia on the Back of the Title of Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus." The Leibniz Review no. 18:269–272.
"The following brief piece of writing by Leibniz was unknown until 1997 when I first presented it to a Leibniz conference in Potsdam. It was handwritten on the back of the title page of his copy of Spinoza’s Tractatus Theologico-Politicus." (p. 269)
(...)
"The finding of these marginalia is not a minor event given the longstanding resistance of Leibniz scholars (since the 19th century) against any influence of Spinoza on Leibniz. As I showed recently (see “Why shouldn’t Leibniz have studied Spinoza? The Rise of the Claim of Continuity in Leibniz’ Philosophy out of the Ideological Rejection of Spinoza’s Impact on Leibniz”, in: The Leibniz Review, December 2007, 107-138), one main argument against any Spinoza-influence was the claim that Leibniz had developed his own metaphysics as early as 1670-1671 – when he had allegedly not yet read Spinoza. Thus, the need to avoid any impact of Spinoza on Leibniz gave rise to the widespread thesis that Leibniz arrived at his metaphysics early and that it developed continuously throughout his life.
Leibniz’ marginalia in his copy of Spinoza’s Theological-Political Treatise from the Boineburg Library, show that he did in fact study Spinoza in 1670 – when he had not yet published his own metaphysics (i.e. prior to the publication of the Hypothesis physica nova or the Theoria motus abstracti). Indeed, he studied Spinoza’s Theological-political Treatise with a pen in his hand. And nobody who knows this work can deny that it includes main arguments of Spinoza’s philosophy and is not at all restricted to theological and political topics.
Thus, given the marginalia, an early influence of Spinoza on Leibniz is at least possible. This does not mean that Leibniz was a Spinozist at any time of his life.
But there are also other ways that one philosopher can influence another – by provocation or stirring someone up, thus causing him/her to work on alternative solutions." (pp. 269-270)
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1803. A summary account of Leibnitz’s memoir, addressed to Lewis XIV, recommending to that monarch the conquest of Egypt, as conducive to the establishing a supreme authority of Europe. London: Printed for J. Hatchard.
"In 1670, Leibniz composed the Consilium Aegyptiacum, a treatise in the form of a letter addressed to Louis XIV of France to persuade the sovereign to undertake a military campaign to conquer Egypt. Citing geopolitical, historical, ideological, and strategic reasons, the Consilium sought to convey the absolute desirability of such an undertaking, not only for the consolidation of French commercial dominance in the East, not only because such a conquest would bring stability to African territory, not only because it would mean an expansion of Christian culture over Islamic culture. Leibniz also saw in this undertaking the possibility of averting internecine war within Europe by uniting the houses of Austria and France in a single body, with the prospect of a reunification of the churches of Christ."
Stoddart, T. L. . 1850. "An account of the "Consilium Aegyptiacum", written by Leibnitz: under the auspices of the elector of Mayence, and presented to Louis XIV." Foreign and Commonwealth Office Collection.
Edited and translated by T. L. Stoddart.
"The object of this paper is to present a distinct but concise account of—
I. The circumstances under which the project was framed.
II. What was already known of it.
III. The papers relating to it, which subsist among the manuscripts of Leibnitz at Hanover.
IV. The general outline of the scheme, with a few of its prominent details.
V. And lastly, the question, whether it suggested the expedition of the French to Egypt, in the year 1798." (p. 1)
De Risi, Vincenzo. 2016. Leibniz on the Parallel Postulate and the Foundations of Geometry: The Unpublished Manuscripts. Cham (Switzerland): Birkhäuser.
"In this book, I provide an edition of Leibniz’ writings on the theory of parallels, which include several attempts to prove the Parallel Postulate. A few of these papers were published by Leibniz himself in his lifetime, while others were only printed in modern editions of his mathematical works. The most important essays, however, were still unpublished, and I have transcribed them from the Leibnizian manuscripts in the Niedersächsische Landesbibliothek in Hannover. Given the enormous amount of Leibnizian papers preserved in the Leibniz-Archiv, I cannot claim to have found all the relevant material, and to have a complete picture of Leibniz’ endeavors in this direction we have to wait for the publication of the related volumes by the Academy Edition of Leibniz’ Werke; since however the scholars at the Leibniz-Archiv have just begun the first surveys of Leibniz’ geometrical writings after 1676, it is likely that a full edition will require many years. In any case, I am confident that the present collection of papers on the theory of parallels is comprehensive enough to give a quite good idea of Leibniz’ work in this field." (Foreword, p. XV)
Contents: 1 Introduction 3; 2 The Theory of Parallel Lines in the Age of Leibniz 7; 2.1 From Antiquity to the Renaissance 7; 2.2 Jesuit and French Attempts in the Seventeenth Century 11; 2.3 Italian and British Attempts in the Seventeenth Century 14; 3 Leibniz’ Epistemology of Geometry and the Parallel Postulate 21; 3.1 Proving Axioms 21; 3.2 Leibniz’ Theory of Definition 31; 3.3 Geometry as the Science of Space 40; 3.4 Philosophy and the Parallel Postulate 49; 4 Leibniz’ Attempts to Prove the Parallel Postulate 57; 4.1 Preliminary Definitions 57; 4.2 Leibniz’ Youth and the Parisian Years (Texts 1–4) 65; 4.3 The First Studies on the Parallel Postulate: 1677–1689 (Texts 5–16) 70; 4.4 Leibniz’ Studies in the 1690s (Texts 17–29 and 34) 80; 4.5 Leibniz’ Late Studies (Texts 30–39) 91; 5 Reception and Legacy 103; 5.1 Toward a Geometry of Space in the Eighteenth Century 103; 5.2 Wolff, Kästner and the Early Reactions 105; 5.3 The Concept of Lage, Direction, and the Actual Infinite 109; 5.4 The Principle of Reason 115; 6 Leibniz’ Texts on Parallel Lines 125; 6.1 From Characteristica geometrica. Reading Notes to Fabri’s “Synopsis geometrica” (1673) 125; 6.2 From De secandis parallelis (1676). 125; 6.3 From Linea infinita & extensio interminata (January–April 1676) 127; 6.4 From Dissertationis de arithmetica circuli quadratura propositiones septem and Quadraturae circuli arithmetica pars prima (April–June 1676) 129; 6.5 From Leibniz’ Marginal Notes to Barrow’s Edition of Euclid (1676–1677) 129; 6.6 From Characteristica geometrica (January 1677) 129; 6.7 From Characteristica geometrica, Scheda 1 (1679) 129; 6.8 From Linea est via puncti … (1679) 131; 6.9 Axioma 13 Euclidis … (Around 1679) 131; 6.10 From De calculo algebraico et constructiones lineares optime conciliandis (January 1680) 133; 6.11 From Elementa nova matheseos universalis (Summer 1683) 135; 6.12 From Definitiones (1685) 137; 6.13 From Si linea recta moveatur … (1685) 139; 6.14 From De curvis similibus et similiter positis et parallelis (1685) 139; 6.15 From Logica de notionibus. Annotata circa schedas Jungianas (1685) 141; 6.16 From Phoranomus (1689) 143; 6.17 From Demonstrationes Euclideas (Around 1690) 143; 6.18 Parallelae (1690) 143; 6.19 From Generalia de natura linearum (Acta eruditorum, September 1692) 145; 6.20 Rectae parallelae (around 1692) 145; 6.21 From Lineam specie datam describere (Around 1693) 147; 6.22 From Leibniz’ Notes to Arnauld’s Nouveaux elemens de geometrie (Around 1693) 147; 6.23 From Elementa geometriae generalia (Around 1694) 153; 6.24 From De novo usu centri gravitatis (Acta eruditorum, November 1695) 153; 6.25 From Expediendi Laboris causa … (Around 1695) 153; 6.26 From Duae rectae parallelae … (1695) 155;L 6.27 Leibniz to Johann Bernoulli (January 29th/February 8th, 1697) 157; 6.28 From Specimen analyseos anagogicae (1698) 159; 6.29 From Justification du Calcul des infinitesimales par celuy de l’Algebre ordinaire (1702) 159; 6.30 From Attentius examinans … (Around 1702) 159; 6.31 From Calculum situs (Around 1702) 161; 6.32 From Table de définitions (1702–1704) 165; 6.33 From Nouveaux Essais sur l’entendement humain, II, xxxi, § 3; and III, iii, § 18 (1703–1705) 165; 6.34 From De lineae super linea incessu (Acta eruditorum, January 1706), and Letter to Johann Bernoulli (July 15th, 1706) 167; 6.35 From Demonstratio omnimoda … (1712) 167; 6.36 From In Euclidis πρῶτα (1712) 169; 6.37 From Spatium absolutum … (August–September 1714) 179; 6.38 From Rectam definio … (1715) 179; 6.39 From Calculi situs fundamenta … (1715) 179;
Bibliography 181; Index of Names 191-195.
Arthur, Richard T. W. 2013. "Leibniz’s Mechanical Principles (c. 1676): Commentary and Translation." The Leibniz Review no. 23:101–105.
"The following is a translation of a short essay by Leibniz, Principia mechanica, that has long been available in its original Latin in the Akademie edition, in series 6, volume 3, N. 6, pp. 101-111. It appears to have been composed some time between late summer 1676 and February 1677, which is why the Academy editors decided to include it with the De Summa Rerum texts. The essay is notable for its extended discussion of the relativity of motion, including several theses usually thought to have originated later, such as the characterization of Copernicanism as the simplest (i.e. most intelligible) hypothesis. But its significance for
understanding the evolution of Leibniz’s views on relativity of motion has been largely underappreciated by commentators, a state of affairs I hope this translation may do something to reverse." (p. 101)
Dal Bo, Federico. 2024. "Leibniz on Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed: A New English Translation." Jewish Studies Quarterly no. 31:361–388.
Abstract: "Sometime between 1677 and 1691, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz read Johann Buxtorf’s Latin translation of Maimonides’ Guide of the Perplexed and made a series of personal notes in Latin, including relevant passages from the Guide, as well as philosophical and theological observations. This is a new English translation of this work, with philological and historical notes based on the 2006 edition of Leibniz’s Complete Works."
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1902. Discourse on Metaphysics, Correspondence with Arnauld, and Monadology. Chicago: The Open Court.
Edited and translated by George R. Montgomery. With an Introduction by Paul Janet.
Second edition revised by Albert R. Chandler 1918.
"The present volume of Leibniz's writings, which now takes its place in the "Philosophical Classics" alongside the works of Descartes, Berkeley, Hume, and Immanuel Kant, is made up of three separate treatises : (1) The Discourse on Metaphysics, (2) Leibniz's Correspondence with Arnauld, and (3) The Monadology. Together they form a composite and logical whole, and afford an excellent survey of Leibniz's thought.
The first two, the Metaphysics and the Correspondence with Arnauld, have never before been translated into English, while the translation of the Monadology is new. The thanks of the public for this translation are due to Dr. George R. Montgomery, instructor in philosophy in Yale University, arid for the suggestion of making the translation to Dr. G. M. Duncan, professor of philosophy in Yale University. The clear and admirable resume of the history of philosophy in Leibniz's time and of his own system from the pen of the late Paul Janet, Member of the French Institute, was added at the suggestion of the editor. Thus with the index, all the necessary material as been furnished in this volume for a comprehension of the thought of one of the most versatile geniuses the world has produced." (Thomas J. McCormack, Editor's Preface, p. VII)
———. 1953. Discourse on Metaphysics: A Translation from the French Based on the Diplomatic Edition. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Translated by Peter G. Lucas and Leslie Grint.
"Leibniz’s Discourse on Metaphysics has not yet been accorded the place it merits in the first rank of the classical texts of modern philosophy. Its general philosophical importance is at least equal to that of the Monadology and its importance for our understanding of Leibniz’s philosophy is a good deal higher. It is the earliest expression of Leibniz’s system as a complete and coherent whole, and there is circumstantial
evidence that it was written at the time at which Leibniz first conceived the system, was composed with the dominant though presumably not exclusive purpose of expressing the system (that is to say it was not, as were all Leibniz’s better known works, couched in a form primarily adapted to some extraneous occasion), and was regarded by him privately as the fundamental complete expression of his philosophy, parts of which he could disclose as circumstances propitious to its various aspects arose. Leibniz is not known to have shown the manuscript to anyone, except the man who made the fair copy for him.
It was first printed in 1846, and again in 1857 and 1880.
The attention of English readers was drawn to it by Bertrand Russell in 1900, in his book on Leibniz; he placed it on its due level of importance, although his interpretation of its significance was sharply one-sided. A diplomatic text was edited by Henri Lestienne in 1907 (now published by Vrin, Paris) following his identification at Hanover of Leibniz’s autograph manuscript." (Preface, p. V)
Ariew, Roger, and Garber, Daniel, eds. 1991. Leibniz: Discourse on Metaphysics and Other Essays. Indianapolis: Hackett.
"Leibniz knew little of the new philosophy before 1672. He was originally brought up in an older tradition of Aristotelian Scholasticism, supplemented with liberal doses of Renaissance humanism. He reports much later in life that he was converted to the new mechanism at age fifteen, in 1661 or 1662, presumably, and reports having given up Aristotle for the new philosophy.(2) But even so, he later confesses that the knowledge he had of the moderns was quite slim at that time, and despite his enthusiasm, the considerable amount of work he did in what he took to be the new philosophy was the work of an amateur."
When in Paris from 1672 to 1676, Leibniz made his entrance into the learned world and did his best to seek out the intellectual luminaries that made Paris an important center of learning. Most important, he came to know Christiaan Huygens, under whose tutelage Leibniz was introduced to the moderns. Leibniz quickly progressed, and in those years he laid the foundations for his calculus, his physics, and the central core of what was to become his philosophy.
Before Leibniz returned to Germany in December 1676, he stopped in England and in Holland, where he met Spinoza. Both Boineburg and the Elector of Mainz had died while he was in Paris.
Leibniz returned to the court of Hanover as a counselor. Though he often traveled and took on responsibilities elsewhere, Hanover was to be his main home for the rest of his life.
(...)
But all the while, through a succession of employers at Hanover and elsewhere, Leibniz continued to develop the philosophical system he had started in Paris and before, in a series of essays, letters, and two books. In metaphysics, the unpublished “Discourse on Metaphysics,” composed in 1686 but anticipated in earlier writings, developed themes discussed in the letters to Arnauld written in that and the following years. Themes from the “Discourse” also appear, somewhat transformed, in the “New System of Nature,” which Leibniz published in 1695—the first public exposition of his metaphysical system— and again in the unpublished essay “On the Ultimate Origination of Things” of 1697 and again in the important essay “On Nature Itself,” published in 1698. These themes appear further transformed in the late summaries of his doctrines, the unpublished “Principles of Nature and Grace” and “Monadology.” Behind the metaphysics of these essays is Leibniz’s program for logic and a universal language, developed most conspicuously in a remarkable series of papers from the late 1670s and 1680s, in which he explicates the concept of truth which he draws upon in the celebrated characterization of the individual he gives in section 8 of the “Discourse.” (Introduction, pp, VI-VII)
Contents: Introduction: Leibniz: Life and Works V; Selected Bibliography of the Works of Leibniz IX; Selected Bibliography of Secondary Works IX; Translations and Other Texts Referred to in the Notes XI; Discourse on Metaphysics (1686) 1; On the Ultimate Origination of Things (1697) 41; Preface to the New Essays (1703-5) 49; The Principles of Philosophy, or, the Monadology (1714) 68; Brief Biographies of Some Contemporaries of Leibniz 82-84.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1992. Discourse on Metaphysics and the Monadology. Buffalo: Prometheus Books.
Translated by George R. Montgomery.
Martin, R. Niall D., and Brown, Stuart, eds. 1988. Leibniz. Discourse on Metaphysics and Related Writings. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
Edited and translated, with an introduction, notes and glossary.
"In preparing this new English edition of Leibniz’s Discourse on Metaphysics we have sought to make it accessible to students with little or no knowledge of seventeenth-century philosophy. The Discourse itself was written for quite a wide range of readers and is less technical and compressed than some of Leibniz’s more academic philosophy. But the work is by no means self-explanatory. It assumes a particular intellectual background and a familiarity with a certain terminology. In including an introduction, notes and a glossary, we have tried to supply some understanding of this background and to explain words that are either technical or are used in an unusual sense.
The text itself is one Leibniz was at pains to revise and we have sought to give a full text with all but minor alterations indicated. The text and translation are the subject of a special section below. Here it is sufficient to explain that this is intended to be a good student edition rather than a critical edition.
All the texts are freshly translated and some of the supplementary texts are here translated into English for the first time. It has not been our purpose in choosing these texts, however, to add to the now considerable volume of Leibniz’s writings in English. Our purpose has been to choose writings where Leibniz himself amplifies on themes that are touched on more briefly in the Discourse itself or where we judged that a comparison with the Discourse would be fruitful. We have not sought to complement the Discourse with writings that deal with different topics or indicate a significant later development of Leibniz’s thought. But we have given references to other works by Leibniz where appropriate.
Any edition of Leibniz’s writings that aims to be helpful must run the risk of over-simplification. In the Introduction, where we have most braved this risk, we have added notes that indicate further the basis for what is being said and refer to other relevant literature. We have also included a bibliography at the end with suggestions as to further reading.
The Discourse and most of the supplementary texts were originally written in French and R. N. D. Martin was primarily responsible for editing and translating them. Stuart Brown translated the remaining (Latin) texts and was primarily responsible for the introduction, the notes and the glossary. The project has, however, been part of a collaborative study of certain aspects of Leibniz’s philosophy from which the mutual benefits have been considerable." (Preface, pp. VIII-IX)
Contents: Preface VIII; Acknowledgements X; Abbreviations XI; Introduction 1; 1. The history of the Discourse 1; 2. The philosophical and religious context 3; 2.1 Innovation and orthodoxy 3; 2.2 The controversy over substantial forms 5; 2.3 Modern philosophy and its religious implications 8; 2.4 Platonism and its problems 13; 3. The central problem of the Discourse 16; 4. The structure and method of the Discourse 20; 5. Achievement and problems 24; Notes 31;
Text and translation 37
Discourse on metaphysics 39; Notes on text of Discourse 85;
Supplementary texts 90
A. Intimations of the ‘Short Discourse on Metaphysics’ (early 1686)
1. Leibniz’s announcement of the work (Extract from a letter to Count Ernst von Hesse-Rheinfels, February 1686) 90; 2. Summary of Discourse sent for Arnauld’s comments 91;
B. The principle of ‘The Perfection of God’s Operations’ (Discourse §§1-7)
3. On Descartes’s conception of God (Extract from an undated letter, c. 1679) 95; 4. The perfection of God and His Creation (from Principles of Nature and of Grace, 1714) 96; 5. Miracles, laws of nature and the will of God (from the Theodicy, 1710) 98;
C. The system of created substances {Discourse §§8-16)
6. On the distinction between God and His creatures (from ‘On Nature Itself’, 1698) 100; 7. The unity of substance (from a letter to Arnauld, April, 1687) 101; 8. The nature of ‘expression’ (from a letter to Arnauld, September 1687) 102;
D. The importance of final causes {Discourse §§17-22)
9. Two sects of naturalists (from an undated paper) 103
10. The importance of final causes in natural science (from An Anagogical Essay, c. 1696) 105
E. The debate about ideas {Discourse §§23-9)
11. ‘Meditations on Knowledge, Truth and Ideas’ (November 1684) 109;
12. On Malebranche’s system (from a letter to Remond, 1715) 115;
F. Application of these principles to religion (Discourse §§30-2)
13. Divine foreknowledge and human free will (from the Theodicy, 1710) 116
14. Accommodating theology as well as physics (from Critical Thoughts on the General Part of the Principles of Descartes, 1692) 121
G. The nature and ‘excellence of minds’ {Discourse§§33-7) 123
15. The hypotheses of ‘concomitance’ and ‘occasional causes’ (from a letter of Arnauld, April 1687) 123;
16. Descartes’s account of immortality (from an undated paper, c. 1679) 127;
17. Personal identity (from remarks on a letter of Arnauld, May 1686) 128;
H. Other explanations and summaries of Leibniz’s system 129 (1686-7)
18. From a letter to Foucher (1686) 129;
19. From an undated paper known as ‘Primary truths’ (late 1686) 131;
20. From a letter to Arnauld (September 1687) 138;
Notes on supplementary texts 141; Glossary 142; Bibliography 156; Index of names 163; Index of subjects 166-170.
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 2012. Discourse on Metaphysics and Other Writings. Peterborough, Canada: Broadview Press.
Reprint of the edition translated by George Montgomery, revised by Peter Lopston.
———. 2020. Leibniz: Discourse on Metaphysics. New York: Oxford University Press.
Translated with Introduction and commentary by Gonzalo Rodriguez-Pereyra.
"The Discourse is divided into thirty-seven sections. Each section is preceded by a short, sometimes very short, heading. Leibniz wanted Arnauld to give him his opinion about the ideas in the Discourse. But instead of sending him the whole work, he sent him these headings of each section. This is how the so-called correspondence between Leibniz and Arnauld got started; but Arnauld never saw the whole manuscript and the whole correspondence is based on the headings sent by Leibniz. Leibniz never published the Discourse, which was published posthumously in Hanover in 1846 by C. L. Grotefend. Its current title was given by Grotefend, but it is taken from a reference to it by Leibniz. Indeed, in the letter to Hessen-Rheinfels in which Leibniz asks him to send the headings of the sections to Arnauld, Leibniz refers to it as ‘a small discourse on metaphysics’ (A 2 2 3/LA 3).
Here is a brief description of the Discourse’s structure and content. The sections are not grouped into larger chapters. But the following rough thematic divisions can be made:
Sections 1–7: divine creative activity and its consequences for human beings.
Sections 8–16: the nature of created substance in general.
Sections 17–22: natural laws and explanation in natural science.
Sections 23–29: ideas.
Sections 30–37: God’s relation to minds." (Introduction, pp. 1-2)
References
A = G. W. Leibniz. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe, edited by the Deutsche Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin. Darmstadt, 1923 ff., Leipzig, 1938 ff., Berlin, 1950 ff.
Johns, Christopher, ed. 2023. Leibniz's Discourse on Metaphysics: A New Translation and Commentary. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
"This is a translation of and commentary on Leibniz’s Discours de Métaphysique, based on the edition published in 1999 by the Berlin-Brandenburgischen Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin-Brandenburg
Academy of Sciences). It makes extensive use of the Academy’s ‘variant apparatus’, which records every deletion, addition, and revision Leibniz made to his first and second drafts. I translate most of the variants, placing them below the main text of the Discourse, and present the main text as a final version, which is virtually identical to Leibniz’s second draft (the ‘fair copy’). The translation thus provides the reader with the means of tracing the development of Leibniz’s thought as he wrote and revised the work. I have also closely examined the digital copies of the manuscripts, consulted other English translations and French editions, and added clarificatory notes. I aim to offer a scholarly translation that is at the same time student friendly. In addition to the commentary, this edition includes a chronicle of Leibniz’s work and activity during the year prior to having composed the Discourse until one year afterward, and includes several letters during that period, previously untranslated in English." (Preface, pp. x-XI)
