Influxus Physicus
O'Neill (Eileen)
Source:
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsColour-ConventionsDisclaimer


Philosophers Index Abstract

    Leibniz claims there are three systems of natural change in created substances: the "hypothesis of occasional causes", his own Pre-established Harmony, and "the common hypothesis of influx" or of "physical influence". But what precisely is this latter system which both the Occasionalists and Leibniz sought to subvert? I begin with an examination of the influx models of natural causation1 with which Leibniz could have been familiar: Neoplatonic, Scholastic, and an Atomistic-Corpuscularian model, as well as Bacon's Multiplication of Species model. I argue that the Neoplatonic replicative model and the Corpuscular diremptive model picture natural change in terms of transmission. I show that the Multiplication of Species model tries to avoid, but ultimately falls back upon, a transmission picture and that Leibniz saw the Scholastics as equally unable to escape this picture of natural change. I discuss Leibniz's complex relation to the Corpuscularians and ask does Leibniz take Descartes's model of natural change to be that of "influxus physicus", and is Leibniz correct? (edited)

Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2018
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)



© Theo Todman, June 2007 - Sept 2018. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page