斯宾诺莎和莱布尼茨有限个体的表达与完善

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania Pub Date : 2022-01-01 DOI:10.5840/jems202211212
S. Tropper
{"title":"斯宾诺莎和莱布尼茨有限个体的表达与完善","authors":"S. Tropper","doi":"10.5840/jems202211212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is obvious that both Spinoza and Leibniz attach importance to the notion of expression in their philosophical writings and that both do so in a similar fashion: They agree, for example, that the mind expresses the body (although this claim has rather different meanings for each of them). Another – albeit related – use of ‘expression’ that appears in both thinkers provides a deeper insight into some metaphysical similarity as well as difference: The idea that expression is closely connected with the perfection and action of individual things. While this relation is explicit in Leibniz, I will show that it is also in a less straightforward way found in Spinoza and, furthermore, that the relation of expression in regards to perfection is similar in Spinoza and Leibniz as both of them regard individuals as perfect insofar as they express the world and God. But one crucial difference in their accounts lies in the claim that, for Spinoza, what is being expressed and gives rise to perfection can be privative in nature, while such a thing cannot be the object of an expression for Leibniz. As I will argue, this not based merely on their different metaphysical views, but also on a difference in what can serve as content of an expression.","PeriodicalId":53837,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","volume":"89 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expression and the Perfection of Finite Individuals in Spinoza and Leibniz\",\"authors\":\"S. Tropper\",\"doi\":\"10.5840/jems202211212\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It is obvious that both Spinoza and Leibniz attach importance to the notion of expression in their philosophical writings and that both do so in a similar fashion: They agree, for example, that the mind expresses the body (although this claim has rather different meanings for each of them). Another – albeit related – use of ‘expression’ that appears in both thinkers provides a deeper insight into some metaphysical similarity as well as difference: The idea that expression is closely connected with the perfection and action of individual things. While this relation is explicit in Leibniz, I will show that it is also in a less straightforward way found in Spinoza and, furthermore, that the relation of expression in regards to perfection is similar in Spinoza and Leibniz as both of them regard individuals as perfect insofar as they express the world and God. But one crucial difference in their accounts lies in the claim that, for Spinoza, what is being expressed and gives rise to perfection can be privative in nature, while such a thing cannot be the object of an expression for Leibniz. As I will argue, this not based merely on their different metaphysical views, but also on a difference in what can serve as content of an expression.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania\",\"volume\":\"89 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems202211212\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/jems202211212","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

很明显,斯宾诺莎和莱布尼茨在他们的哲学著作中都重视表达的概念,而且他们都以类似的方式这样做:例如,他们都同意心灵表达身体(尽管这一主张对他们两人来说有相当不同的含义)。两位思想家对“表达”的另一种用法——尽管与之相关——提供了对形而上学的相似和不同的更深层次的洞察:表达与个体事物的完美和行为密切相关。虽然这种关系在莱布尼茨的作品中是明确的,但我将表明,在斯宾诺莎的作品中,这种关系也以一种不那么直接的方式出现,而且,斯宾诺莎和莱布尼茨关于完美的表达关系是相似的,因为他们都认为个人在表达世界和上帝时是完美的。但是,在他们的叙述中,一个关键的区别在于,对于斯宾诺莎来说,正在被表达并导致完美的东西在本质上可以是剥夺性的,而对于莱布尼茨来说,这样的东西不可能是表达的对象。正如我将要论证的,这不仅仅是基于他们不同的形而上学观点,还基于在什么可以作为一种表达的内容上的不同。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Expression and the Perfection of Finite Individuals in Spinoza and Leibniz
It is obvious that both Spinoza and Leibniz attach importance to the notion of expression in their philosophical writings and that both do so in a similar fashion: They agree, for example, that the mind expresses the body (although this claim has rather different meanings for each of them). Another – albeit related – use of ‘expression’ that appears in both thinkers provides a deeper insight into some metaphysical similarity as well as difference: The idea that expression is closely connected with the perfection and action of individual things. While this relation is explicit in Leibniz, I will show that it is also in a less straightforward way found in Spinoza and, furthermore, that the relation of expression in regards to perfection is similar in Spinoza and Leibniz as both of them regard individuals as perfect insofar as they express the world and God. But one crucial difference in their accounts lies in the claim that, for Spinoza, what is being expressed and gives rise to perfection can be privative in nature, while such a thing cannot be the object of an expression for Leibniz. As I will argue, this not based merely on their different metaphysical views, but also on a difference in what can serve as content of an expression.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania
Journal of Early Modern Studies-Romania HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
期刊最新文献
Theatrum vitae humanae: Shakespeare’s Cosmographic Imagination ‘Playing at Bo-peep with the world’ The Author/Actor in Charlotte Charke’s Narrative Practical Cosmography in Early Modern Iberia: Alonso de Chaves and his Espejo de Navegantes Getting the Message of Abraham Ortelius’ Heart-Shaped Map and Atlas Cosmography, Knowledge in Transit: A Conspectus
×
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