Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T10:06:00.824Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

In Leibniz’s Wake: Rationalist Paradise Lost

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 December 2022

Joe Stratmann Open the ORCID record for Joe Stratmann [Opens in a new window]
Joe Stratmann*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, United States
*
Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The eighteenth-century German rationalist tradition is, broadly speaking, committed to (what I call) ‘the principle of rational cognition’: the grounded must be rationally cognizable from its sufficient ground. Whereas the prevailing view takes the fundamental challenge to rationalist paradise to stem from the principle of sufficient reason, I argue that it instead stems from this principle: How is it possible to rationally cognize anything at all from its ground? By investigating the opposing responses of two of Leibniz’s most influential immediate successors, Christian Wolff and Christian Crusius, we find no easy way to remain in rationalist paradise.

Keywords

RationalismLeibnizWolffCrusiuscognitiongroundreason
Type
Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 52 , Issue 5 , July 2022 , pp. 517 - 539
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Canadian Journal of Philosophy

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Adams, Robert. 1994. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Anderson, Abraham. 2020. Kant, Hume, and the Interruption of Dogmatic Slumber. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Anderson, R. Lanier. 2015. The Poverty of Conceptual Truth: Kant’s Analytic/Synthetic Distinction and the Limits of Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bealer, George. 2002. “Modal Epistemology and the Rationalist Renaissance.” In Conceivability and Possibility, edited by Gendler, Tamar Szabo and Hawthorne, John, 71–125. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Beck, Lewis White. 1969. Early German Philosophy: Kant and His Predecessors. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bender, Sebastian. 2016. Leibniz’ Metaphysik der Modalität. Berlin: De Gruyter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bennett, Jonathan. 1966. Kant’s Analytic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boehm, Omri. 2014. Kant’s Critique of Spinoza. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campo, Mariano. 1939. Cristiano Wolff e il razionalismo precritico. Hildesheim: Georg Olms Verlag.Google Scholar
Carriero, John. 1993. “Leibniz on Infinite Resolution and Intramundane Contingency—Part One: Infinite Resolution.” Studia Leibnitiana 25 (1): 1–26.Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. 1907. Das Erkenntnisproblem in der Philosophie und Wissenschaft der neueren Zeit. Vol. 2, Berlin: Bruno Cassirer Verlag.Google Scholar
Cataldi, Luigi. 2001. Christian Wolff und das System des klassischen Rationalismus. Hildesheim: George Olms Verlag.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David. 2012. Constructing the World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chalmers, David J., Manley, David, and Wasserman, Ryan, eds. 2009. Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Couturat, Louis. 1972. “On Leibniz’s Metaphysics.” In Leibniz: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Frankfurt, Harry. New York: Anchor.Google Scholar
Cover, Jan, and Hawthorne, John. 2000. “Infinite Analysis and the Problem of the Lucky Proof.” Studia Leibnitiana 32 (2): 151–65.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian. 1743. De Usu et Limitibus principii rationis determinantis vulgo sufficientis [De Usu]. Gleditsch.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian. 1745. Entwurf der nothwendigen Vernunft-Wahrheiten [Entwurf]. Gleditsch.Google Scholar
Crusius, Christian. 1747. Weg zur Gewißheit und Zuverlässigkeit der menschlichen Erkenntnis [Weg]. Gleditsch.Google Scholar
Dasgupta, Shamik. 2016. “Metaphysical Rationalism.” Noûs 50 (2): 379–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Della Rocca, Michael. 2008. “Causation without Intelligibility and Causation without God in Descartes.” In A Companion to Descartes, edited by Broughton, Janet and Carriero, John, 235–50. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Della Rocca, Michael. 2013. “Adventures in Rationalism.” Philosophic Exchange 13 (1).Google Scholar
Di Bella, Stefano. 2005. “Leibniz’s Theory of Conditions: A Framework for Ontological Dependence.” The Leibniz Review 15: 67–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunlop, Katherine. 2018. “Definitions and Empirical Justification in Christian Wolff’s Theory of Science.” History of Philosophy & Logical Analysis 21 (1): 149–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey. 2014. Kant and Rational Psychology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey, and Sassen, Brigitte. 2021. “18th Century German Philosophy Prior to Kant.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter), edited by Edward N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/18thGerman-preKant/.Google Scholar
École, Jean. 1979. “ En quel sens peut-on dire que Wolff est rationaliste?” Studia Leibnitiana 11 (1): 45–61.Google Scholar
Fisher, A. R. J. 2011. “Causal and Logical Necessity in Malebranche’s Occasionalism.” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 41 (4): 523–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, Michael. 1990. “Kant on Concepts and Intuitions in the Mathematical Sciences.” Synthese 84 (2): 213–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fugate, Courtney. 2014. “Alexander Baumgarten on the Principle of Sufficient Reason.” Philosophica 44: 127–47.Google Scholar
Futch, Michael J. 2005. “Leibnizian Causation.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (3): 451–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gava, Gabriele. 2018. “Kant, Wolff, and the Method of Philosophy.” In Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy , Volume VIII, edited by Garber, Daniel and Rutherford, Donald, 271–304. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Heidegger, Martin. 1929. “ Vom Wesen des Grundes .” In Festschrift. Edmund Husserl zum 70. Geburtstag, 71–100. Halle: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
Heimsoeth, Heinz. 1926. Metaphysik und Kritik bei Chr . Aug. Crusius. Berlin: Deutsche Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Hogan, Desmond. 2009. “Three Kinds of Rationalism and the Non-Spatiality of Things in Themselves.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 47 (3): 355–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hogan, Desmond. 2013. “Metaphysical Motives of Kant’s Analytic-Synthetic Distinction.” Journal of the History of Philosophy 51 (2): 267–307.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2017. Leibniz on Causation and Agency. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1900–. Kants gesammelte Schriften, edited by the Berlin-Brandenburg (formerly Royal Prussian) Academy of Sciences. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1992. Theoretical Philosophy, 1755–1770. Translated and edited by Walford, David and Meerbote, Ralf. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1998. Critique of Pure Reason. Translated and edited by Guyer, Paul and Wood, Allen. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kreimendahl, Lothar. 2007. “ Empirische Elemente im Denken Wolffs .” In Christian Wolff und die europäische Aufklärung: Akten des 1. Internationalen Christian-Wolff-Kongresses, edited by Stolzenberg, Jürgen and Rudolph, Oliver-Pierre, 95–112. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1875–90. Die philosophischen Schriften [G]. 7 vols. Edited by Gerhardt, C. I.. Berlin. Reprint, Hildesheim: Olms, 1965.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1923. Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe [A]. Edited by der Wissenschaften, Deutsche Akademie. Darmstadt and Berlin: Akedemie-Verlag.Google Scholar
Leibniz, Gottfried Wilhelm. 1989. Leibniz: Philosophical Essays [AG]. Translated and edited by Ariew, Roger and Garber, Daniel. Indianapolis: Hackett.Google Scholar
Lenders, Winfried. 1971. Die analytische Begriffs- und Urteilstheorie von G. W. Leibniz und Chr. Wolff. Hildesheim: Olms.Google Scholar
Lin, Martin. 2012. “Rationalism and Necessitarianism.” Noûs 46 (3): 418–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, Martin. 2014. “Efficient Causation in Spinoza and Leibniz.” In Efficient Causation: A History, edited by Schmaltz, Tad, 165–91. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Look, Brandon. 2018. “Baumgarten’s Rationalism.” In Baumgarten and Kant on Metaphysics, edited by Fugate, Courtney and Hymers, John. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, Arthur O. 1936. The Great Chain of Being. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Rauzy, Jean-Baptiste. 1995. “Quid sit natura prius? La conception leibnizienne de l’ordre.” Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 100 (1) : 31–48.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1903. “Recent Work on the Philosophy of Leibniz.” Mind 12 (46): 177–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutherford, Donald. 1992. “Leibniz’s Principle of Intelligibility.” History of Philosophical Quarterly 9 (1): 35–49.Google Scholar
Rutherford, Donald. 1998. Leibniz and the Rational Order of Nature. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rutherford, Donald. 2022. “Leibniz on the Ideality of Space.” In Leibniz and Kant, edited by Look, Brandon, 79–111. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schaffer, Jonathan. 2009. “On What Grounds What.” In Metametaphysics: New Essays on the Foundations of Ontology, edited by Chalmers, David J., Manley, David, and Wasserman, Ryan, 347–83. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smit, Houston. 2009. “Kant on Apriority and the Spontaneity of Cognition.” In Metaphysics and the Good: Themes from the Philosophy of Robert Merrihew Adams, edited by Newlands, Samuel and Jorgensen, Larry M., 188–251. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stang, Nicholas. 2016. Kant’s Modal Metaphysics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stratmann, Joe. Forthcoming. “From Dogmatic Slumber to Rationalist Nightmares: Kant among the Dreamers of Reason.” European Journal of Philosophy. Google Scholar
Tonelli, Giorgio. 1959. Elementi metodologici e metafisici in Kant dal 1745 al 1768. Edizioni di Filosofia.Google Scholar
van den Berg, Hein. 2011. “Wolff and Kant on Scientific Demonstration and Mechanical Explanation.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 95 (2): 178–205.Google Scholar
Vanzo, Alberto. 2015. “Christian Wolff and Experimental Philosophy.” In Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy, Vol. VII, edited by Garber, Daniel and Rutherford, Donald, 225–55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, Eric. 2005. Kant and the Metaphysics of Causality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, Margaret. 1969. “On Leibniz’s Explication of Necessary Truth.” Studia Leibnitiana, supplementa 3: 50–63.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1713. Vernünftige Gedanken von den Kräften des menschlichen Verstandes und ihrem richtigen Gebrauch in der Erkenntnis der Wahrheit [Deutsche Logik]. Halle.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1720. Vernünftige Gedancken von Gott, der Welt, und der Seele des Menschen, auch allen Dingen überhaupt [Deutsche Metaphysik]. Halle.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1728a. Discursus Praeliminaris De Philosophia in Genere. [Disc. Praelim.]. In Philosophia rationalis sive Logica. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1728b. Philosophia Rationalis sive Logica: methodo scientifica pertractata [Logica]. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1730. Philosophia Prima, sive Ontologia: methodo scientifica pertractata [Ontologia]. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1731. Cosmologia Generalis: methodo scientifica pertractata [Cosmologia]. Frankfurt and Leipzig.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1732. Psychologia Empirica: methodo scientifica pertractata [Psychologia Empirica]. Frankfurt and Leipzig.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1736. Theologia Naturalis: methodo scientifica pertractata, pars prior [Theologia Naturalis]. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Wolff, Christian. 1737. Theologia Naturalis: methodo scientifica pertractata, pars posterior [Theologia Naturalis II]. Frankfurt.Google Scholar
Wundt, Max. 1945. Die Deutsche Schulphilosophie im Zeitalter der Aufklärung. Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr.Google Scholar