Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716) stands as one of history’s supreme intellects, a polymath whose contributions spanned philosophy, mathematics, and science.
His philosophical legacy, however, is complex. It is marked by two distinct systems: a public, optimistic, and orthodox philosophy designed to gain princely approval, and a profound, coherent, and largely Spinozistic esoteric doctrine that remained mostly unpublished during his lifetime.
It was the popular Leibniz who famously coined the phrase “this is the best of all possible worlds,” a doctrine later satirized by Voltaire, while his deeper, more logical insights were only unearthed by later scholars.
Leibniz’s philosophy fundamentally diverged from Descartes and Spinoza on the nature and number of substances. He rejected the idea that extension could be an attribute of a substance, arguing that extension implies plurality. Instead, he posited an infinite number of unextended substances called “monads.”
Each monad, essentially a soul, is a self-contained, “windowless” entity, meaning it has no causal interaction with any other monad. The apparent interaction between monads, and the way each monad “mirrors” the universe, is explained by a “pre-established harmony,” meticulously orchestrated by God. This ingenious (and to some, bizarre) solution to the mind-body problem asserted that God had programmed each monad to unfold its perceptions in perfect synchronization with all others, thereby creating the semblance of a unified, interacting world.
💡 God’s Existence: Logic and the Problem of Evil
Leibniz brought the metaphysical proofs for God’s existence to their most refined form. He presented four main arguments:
- The ontological argument (God, as the most perfect being, must exist).
- The cosmological argument (the universe, being contingent, requires a necessary reason for its existence outside itself).
- The argument from eternal truths (eternal truths must exist as thoughts in an eternal mind).
- The argument from pre-established harmony/design (the order and coherence of the universe point to an intelligent creator).
While modern theologians have largely moved away from these purely intellectual proofs, Leibniz’s rigorous articulation of them remains historically significant.
His doctrine of many possible worlds was central to his solution to the problem of evil. A world is “possible” if it does not contradict the laws of logic. God, being good, chose to create the best of all possible worlds—not necessarily one without any evil, but one with the greatest excess of good over evil.
He argued that certain great goods (like free will) are logically bound up with certain evils (like sin). God foresaw Adam’s sin but chose to create a world where humanity was free, even if it meant the presence of evil, because this world, despite its imperfections, had a greater surplus of good than any other possible world. This argument, while logically possible, has been criticized for its complacency in the face of suffering.
Leibniz’s esoteric philosophy, revealed in his private papers, suggests an even deeper determinism, where every true proposition about an individual substance is analytic and eternally contained within its notion—a view he carefully concealed from public scrutiny.
Despite his often dry writing style and the eventual decline of his direct influence, Leibniz’s profound logical insights and his audacious metaphysical constructions continue to challenge and inspire philosophers, making him a truly monumental figure in the history of thought.
Source: Russell, Bertrand. A History of Western Philosophy. Simon and Schuster, 1945.
More Topics
- The Utilitarians: Can Happiness Be Quantified and Legislated?
- Karl Marx: The Philosopher of History, Class, and Revolution
- Bergson: The Philosopher of Life, Intuition, and Creative Evolution
- William James: Radical Empiricism and the ‘Will to Believe’
- John Dewey: Instrumentalism and the Evolution of Truth
- Locke’s Theory of Knowledge: How Did Empiricism Challenge Innate Ideas?
- Locke’s Political Philosophy: How Did He Justify Government by Consent?
