Lexicon of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute
 
[german]


Complaints - Corrections

Table
Concepts
Versus
Sc. Camps
Theses I
Theses II

Concept/Author*  

What is wrong?
Page
Other metadata
Translation
Excerpt or content
Other

Correction: Year / Place / Page
/ /

Correction:
(max 500 charact.)

Your username*
or User-ID

Email address*

The complaint
will not be published.

 
Holz I 73
Totality/whole/outer/outside/Leibniz: because it is one and all (hen kei pan) as such, this supreme general must be conceived outside the series rerum. The world is not a link, but the series itself. ((s) Therefore not outside).
>Interior/exterior/Leibniz, >Reality/Leibniz, >Order/Leibniz, >Terminology/Leibniz.
Aristotle: thus the whole series is "being itself" (on hê on).
Holz: the absolutely irreducible sentence, the first axiom at all: "The world is all that what is the case".
The connection of all bodies, however, is not itself a body, that is, not extensional (res extensa, Descartes) but intensional, the structure.
>Intension/Leibniz, >Extension.
This is the "complete concept". >Hegel: "absolute concept".
Complete concept/Leibniz: the complete concept contains all possible conditions and determinations for the existence of a particular being, it is thus identical with the concept of the world as a whole.
>Concept/Leibniz.
It is only perceptible to an infinite mind.
>Perception/Leibniz, >Knowledge/Leibniz.
I 74
Identity/Leibniz/Holz: the identity of the finite with itself is formally not to be distinguished from the identity of the infinite whole with itself.
Outer/outside/whole/Leibniz: If there was an infinite mind, it would have to be outside the whole to be able to grasp it at the same time. But with this the whole would not be the whole anymore.
It is a priori true that the whole cannot be mapped isotropically.
Hence, the boundary concept of the infinite mind remains a heuristic fiction, a heuristic analogy to the finite mind.
I 113
Single/whole/identity/Leibniz/Holz: the identity of the individual with the whole and vice versa is based on the distinction between the two. (> Hegel: Reason: the >unity of identity and difference).
Leibniz: the
immanence of substance in the world and the
inherence of the world in the individual substance.
Logical form/Holz: the "overarching general":´
I 114
The whole has two types:
A) the whole itself and
B) the individual, which on the one hand is a kind of whole ((s) by demarcation), and yet its opposite, namely, a part.
>Order/Leibniz.
The ontological correspondence of this logical structure:
Twofold way of being in:
(A) "in the world"
(B) Substance itself as something comprehensive, in which the totality of all other substances, that is, the world, is "contained" as a condition of its own.
>Substance/Leibniz.

Found an error? Use our Complaint Form. Perhaps someone forgot to close a bracket? A page number is wrong?
Help us to improve our lexicon.
However, if you are of a different opinion, as regards the validity of the argument, post your own argument beside the contested one.
The correction will be sent to the contributor of the original entry to get his opinion about.