Fundamental Perception in Leibniz’s Philosophy and Contemporary Panpsychism

M. S. Sysoev
{"title":"Fundamental Perception in Leibniz’s Philosophy and Contemporary Panpsychism","authors":"M. S. Sysoev","doi":"10.5840/eps202259350","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines the fundamental ontological significance that the category of perception has in philosophy of G.W. Leibniz, and establishes the connection between the category of perception and modern panpsychism. There is a problem of definition of protopsychic properties in modern panpsychism. The problem is expressed not only in the absence of such a definition, but also in the absence of a good strategy for finding possible candidates for the role of protopsychic property. To solve this problem, the author considers the status of the monad as the center of perception in Leibniz’s monadology, as well as the question of the relation of different monads to each other. Based on Leibniz’s ideas, the following modifications for modern panpsychism have been proposed, among others. First, it was proposed that protopsychic properties be viewed as properties that represent all reality in some vague way, preventing the emergence of high-level psychic properties. Second, it was proposed that mental properties be viewed not as a combination of protopsychic properties, but as state of protopsychic properties. This means that to form high-level mental properties, protopsychic properties must not only form some system, but must also be partially blocked. The author also considers the question of whether it is possible to borrow the proposed ideas in modern panpsychism. The problem for this is the ontological differences between modern naturalistic panpsychism and Leibniz’s classical panpsychism. The article proposes three different strategies for dealing with this problem related to three interpretations of Leibniz’s philosophy. First, it is possible to limit ourselves to considering physics as a set of structural phenomena derived from the activity of monads. Second, it is possible to try to show that there is some other, non-causal, type of relationship between the monads. Third, it is possible to consider this system as naturalistic pantheism and assume that God is a mediator and a common non-spatial coordinate system through which the monads agree with each other.","PeriodicalId":369041,"journal":{"name":"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science","volume":"24 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202259350","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

This article examines the fundamental ontological significance that the category of perception has in philosophy of G.W. Leibniz, and establishes the connection between the category of perception and modern panpsychism. There is a problem of definition of protopsychic properties in modern panpsychism. The problem is expressed not only in the absence of such a definition, but also in the absence of a good strategy for finding possible candidates for the role of protopsychic property. To solve this problem, the author considers the status of the monad as the center of perception in Leibniz’s monadology, as well as the question of the relation of different monads to each other. Based on Leibniz’s ideas, the following modifications for modern panpsychism have been proposed, among others. First, it was proposed that protopsychic properties be viewed as properties that represent all reality in some vague way, preventing the emergence of high-level psychic properties. Second, it was proposed that mental properties be viewed not as a combination of protopsychic properties, but as state of protopsychic properties. This means that to form high-level mental properties, protopsychic properties must not only form some system, but must also be partially blocked. The author also considers the question of whether it is possible to borrow the proposed ideas in modern panpsychism. The problem for this is the ontological differences between modern naturalistic panpsychism and Leibniz’s classical panpsychism. The article proposes three different strategies for dealing with this problem related to three interpretations of Leibniz’s philosophy. First, it is possible to limit ourselves to considering physics as a set of structural phenomena derived from the activity of monads. Second, it is possible to try to show that there is some other, non-causal, type of relationship between the monads. Third, it is possible to consider this system as naturalistic pantheism and assume that God is a mediator and a common non-spatial coordinate system through which the monads agree with each other.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
莱布尼茨哲学的基本观念与当代泛心论
本文考察了感知范畴在莱布尼茨哲学中的基本本体论意义,并建立了感知范畴与现代泛心论的联系。在现代泛心论中存在着一个关于原心性的定义问题。这个问题不仅是在缺乏这样一个定义的情况下表现出来的,而且也是在缺乏一个好的策略来寻找原心性质的可能候选角色的情况下表现出来的。为了解决这一问题,笔者考虑了单子在莱布尼茨单子论中作为感知中心的地位,以及不同单子之间的相互关系问题。基于莱布尼茨的想法,以下修改现代泛心论已提出,其中。首先,有人提出,原型心理属性被视为以某种模糊的方式代表所有现实的属性,从而阻止高级心理属性的出现。其次,提出心理属性不应被视为原心理属性的组合,而应被视为原心理属性的状态。这意味着要形成高级心理属性,原生心理属性不仅必须形成某种系统,而且必须部分受阻。作者还考虑了是否有可能借用现代泛心论提出的思想的问题。这里的问题是现代自然泛心论和莱布尼茨古典泛心论的本体论差异。本文通过对莱布尼茨哲学的三种解释,提出了三种不同的策略来处理这一问题。首先,我们有可能把物理学局限于把它看作是一组从单子的活动中派生出来的结构现象。其次,有可能试图证明在单子之间存在某种其他的、非因果的关系。第三,可以把这个系统看作是自然主义的泛神论,假设上帝是一个中介者,是一个共同的非空间坐标系统,通过这个系统,单子彼此一致。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Popper and His Popular Critics: Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend and Imre Lakatos: Appendix Has Science Ever Been “Normal”? A Reply to “How is Post-Normal Science Possible?” by Lada Shipovalova On the Universality of Philosophical Reflection: Reply to Critics The History of Science in the Context of the State Ideology Criticism of Cartesian Account of Self-Knowledge in English-speaking Analytic Philosophy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1