Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz.
This article examines the scope and consistency of the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz’s thought. Its thesis is that actualism underlies the Leibnizian corpus as a background of tension that prevents the closure of the Leibnizian metaphysics of possible worlds from a single interpret...
Guardado en:
| Autor Principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo revista |
| Lenguaje: | spa |
| Publicado: |
ARFIL y UNL
2020
|
| Acceso en línea: | https://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/Topicos/article/view/10000 |
| id |
oai:bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar:article-10000 |
|---|---|
| recordtype |
dspace |
| spelling |
oai:bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar:article-100002022-05-04T11:34:41Z Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. Entre el actualismo y la “teoría estándar de los mundos posibles” en Leibniz. Gaiada, Griselda This article examines the scope and consistency of the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz’s thought. Its thesis is that actualism underlies the Leibnizian corpus as a background of tension that prevents the closure of the Leibnizian metaphysics of possible worlds from a single interpretation of the origin of things. To this end, a three-stage periodization of Leibniz’s explanations about the origination of the world is offered: firstly, a pure actualist model; secondly, an emanantist model and a creationist model, both coexisting and being interpretable in possibilist terms as well as in actualist terms; finally, an actualist model of “resultant will”. Our goal is not to take sides with some model or another, but only to make visible that all of them coexist in Leibniz’s writings as elements which dislocate within a sole and relatively closed interpretation. Este artículo se interroga sobre el alcance y consistencia de la “teoría estándar de los mundos posibles” en el pensamiento de Leibniz. La tesis defendida es que el actualismo subyace en el corpus leibniziano como un fondo de tensión que impide clausurar la metafísica leibniziana de los MP a partir de una sola interpretación sobre el origen de las cosas. Para ello, se ofrece una periodización en tres etapas de las explicaciones de Leibniz al respecto: 1. un modelo actualista puro; 2. un modelo emanantista y otro creacionista, ambos coexistentes e interpretables tanto en términos posibilistas como actualistas; 3. un modelo actualista de “voluntad resultante”. Nuestro objetivo no es tomar partido por uno u otro modelo, sino mostrar que todos ellos conviven en la literatura leibniziana como elementos que dislocan dentro de una única y relativamente cerrada interpretación. ARFIL y UNL 2020-12-29 info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion artículo Articulo info:ar-repo/semantics/artículo application/pdf https://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/Topicos/article/view/10000 10.14409/topicos.v0i39.10000 Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía de Santa Fe; Núm. 39 (2020): Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía de Santa Fe; 46-80 Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía de Santa Fe; No 39 (2020): Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía de Santa Fe; 46-80 1668-723X 1666-485X 10.14409/topicos.v0i39 spa info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/EC/FP7/ https://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/Topicos/article/view/10000/13460 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess Derechos de autor 2020 Tópicos. Revista de Filosofía de Santa Fe |
| institution |
Universidad Nacional del Litoral |
| collection |
Publicaciones periódicas |
| language |
spa |
| format |
Artículo revista |
| description |
This article examines the scope and consistency of the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz’s thought. Its thesis is that actualism underlies the Leibnizian corpus as a background of tension that prevents the closure of the Leibnizian metaphysics of possible worlds from a single interpretation of the origin of things. To this end, a three-stage periodization of Leibniz’s explanations about the origination of the world is offered: firstly, a pure actualist model; secondly, an emanantist model and a creationist model, both coexisting and being interpretable in possibilist terms as well as in actualist terms; finally, an actualist model of “resultant will”. Our goal is not to take sides with some model or another, but only to make visible that all of them coexist in Leibniz’s writings as elements which dislocate within a sole and relatively closed interpretation. |
| author |
Gaiada, Griselda |
| spellingShingle |
Gaiada, Griselda Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. |
| author_facet |
Gaiada, Griselda |
| author_sort |
Gaiada, Griselda |
| title |
Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. |
| title_short |
Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. |
| title_full |
Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. |
| title_fullStr |
Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in Leibniz. |
| title_sort |
between actualism and the “standard theory of possible worlds” in leibniz. |
| publisher |
ARFIL y UNL |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| url |
https://bibliotecavirtual.unl.edu.ar/publicaciones/index.php/Topicos/article/view/10000 |
| _version_ |
1733712054753165312 |
| score |
11.8626 |