Going through this series, started a couple of weeks back. So much Value❤❤❤ My thinking is in a whirlwind with these questions. So much better than gossip.😅😊
I have been going through your videos in chronological order. They just keep getting better and better, and they were great to start out with. Thank you so much.
I think the idea that Monads are infinitesimally tiny does distort Leibniz's explanation in that we would naturally consider something that has "no space" to necessarily be tiny, but if you look at an empty glass or cup, no one would describe that emptiness as "no water" or "no coffee" necessarily - only in the particular context of what you want to drink. Otherwise, it is just empty and the "substance" is immaterial. So, for the monads, space is immaterial as anything that extends into space could be divisible and anything that is divisible, by Leibniz's reasoning, cannot be said to be a true substance but a compound of some kind. Any considerations of size are essentially nonsense as something that lacks any space is impossible to measure with spatial dimensions. You can't hold a monad up and compare it to a ruler. It is interesting though that Leibniz's monadology does seem to predict some of the conceptual difficulties that physicists would later grapple with on the quantum scale as well as later theories like String Theory or Holographic Universe Theory.
Its not really surprising thought that his musings predate and predicts the stagnation experienced over the last 6 decades by the physics community. He already grappled with Newton over the relational vs absolute theory of space, force and time. HECK we don't even know the one way speed of light yet for crying out loud
George Steiner, he makes a brief mention of 'necessary possibility' in the opening chapter of _Real Presences_ So... I thought I'd check; Leibniz pops up on inquiry, hahaha, here I am.
A bit strange ... hard to understand. How is a tautology a truth of reason? A bachelor IS unmarried--isn't this just semantics? Yeah ... I'm having difficulties 😱....
Going through this series, started a couple of weeks back. So much Value❤❤❤ My thinking is in a whirlwind with these questions. So much better than gossip.😅😊
I have been going through your videos in chronological order. They just keep getting better and better, and they were great to start out with. Thank you so much.
I dont get why these episodes dosent have more views 😢❤
BEAUTIFUL. Thank you Stephen ❤️
I think the idea that Monads are infinitesimally tiny does distort Leibniz's explanation in that we would naturally consider something that has "no space" to necessarily be tiny, but if you look at an empty glass or cup, no one would describe that emptiness as "no water" or "no coffee" necessarily - only in the particular context of what you want to drink. Otherwise, it is just empty and the "substance" is immaterial. So, for the monads, space is immaterial as anything that extends into space could be divisible and anything that is divisible, by Leibniz's reasoning, cannot be said to be a true substance but a compound of some kind. Any considerations of size are essentially nonsense as something that lacks any space is impossible to measure with spatial dimensions. You can't hold a monad up and compare it to a ruler.
It is interesting though that Leibniz's monadology does seem to predict some of the conceptual difficulties that physicists would later grapple with on the quantum scale as well as later theories like String Theory or Holographic Universe Theory.
Its not really surprising thought that his musings predate and predicts the stagnation experienced over the last 6 decades by the physics community. He already grappled with Newton over the relational vs absolute theory of space, force and time.
HECK we don't even know the one way speed of light yet for crying out loud
I really loved this episode !
Lee Monade. In the root of every Lemon.
George Steiner, he makes a brief mention of 'necessary possibility' in the opening chapter of _Real Presences_
So... I thought I'd check; Leibniz pops up on inquiry, hahaha, here I am.
Leibniz, in a way, updated Democritus's philosophy.
Do the math, it's all in ontological mathematics. The work of Leibniz is complete, existence has been answered.
17:30 because I need to write a 6 page fucking paper on Leibniz’s perfect world argument and I need all the bullshit I can fill it with
As above, so below.
How can non-material monads make up our material body? Or do monads only exist as a metaphysical reality?
It has been said in this video that the Monads were perceived as a physical material.
He was correct. Think of this as science before we could peer into the sub-molecular world.
Of course; others would claim otherwise and refer to it as the Easter Bunny of science, lol. Turns out quarks are just that weird.
@@RobVollat Even more weird so, since there is still no justifiable model or theories for particles that advances the assertion of their existence
i like peas
A bit strange ... hard to understand. How is a tautology a truth of reason? A bachelor IS unmarried--isn't this just semantics? Yeah ... I'm having difficulties 😱....
This is insufferable. Just get to Leibniz.