{"title":"Leibniz in Paris","authors":"O. Nachtomy","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190907327.003.0003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The first section of this chapter presents Leibniz’s rejection of infinite number in response to Galileo’s paradox. The next section presents a problem that arises from his resolution of the paradox. The problem is this: if Leibniz regards the notion of infinite number as inconsistent, how is it that he regards the notion of infinite being as consistent? In the third section, the author considers a semantic solution to this problem and concludes that it is appealing but ultimately inadequate. In the fourth section, the author considers a more promising solution—namely that Leibniz distinguishes between different senses of infinity. The chapter concludes with a discussion of Leibniz’s attitude toward infinity vis-à-vis his critique of Descartes’s distinction between the infinite and the indefinite.","PeriodicalId":399285,"journal":{"name":"Living Mirrors","volume":"40 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-02-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Living Mirrors","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190907327.003.0003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The first section of this chapter presents Leibniz’s rejection of infinite number in response to Galileo’s paradox. The next section presents a problem that arises from his resolution of the paradox. The problem is this: if Leibniz regards the notion of infinite number as inconsistent, how is it that he regards the notion of infinite being as consistent? In the third section, the author considers a semantic solution to this problem and concludes that it is appealing but ultimately inadequate. In the fourth section, the author considers a more promising solution—namely that Leibniz distinguishes between different senses of infinity. The chapter concludes with a discussion of Leibniz’s attitude toward infinity vis-à-vis his critique of Descartes’s distinction between the infinite and the indefinite.