Abstract
In this paper I present and evaluate Leibniz’s two main arguments against the existence of atoms. In this context atoms are extended particles that are absolutely hard, homogeneous, indivisible, and indestructible by natural means. As we shall see, Leibniz’s arguments are flawed in a very instructive way. The first argument is in tension with the claim that God created the best possible world. The second argument overgeneralizes in an undesirable way. However, as I shall discuss in the last section of the paper, even if the arguments are somehow defective, at least the first one contributes valuable insights to contemporary metaphysics.
Highlights
If we are ready to accept the existence of extended objects, it is easy to accept the existence of divisible objects
A further question is whether extended objects can be divided an infinite number of times
On the basis of this paragraph we can notice that Leibniz has a wide conception of what can be called an ‘identity.’ Today philosophers would be tempted to say that identity statements are those of the form “A is B” and that all the other examples provided by Leibniz in the paragraph above are not identity statements but consequences of identity statements plus other axioms and definitions
Summary
I would like to introduce a further remark for the purposes of clarification. It is easy to mistakenly identify Atomism with the view that. There is nothing incoherent about the view according to which there is an extended object, with proper parts, that cannot be divided. The existence of the proper parts of an atom depends on the existence of atoms If this is so, we can keep the view that atoms are fundamental entities with proper parts. The idea supporting this view is that the proper parts of an atom are not separate entities It is not as if the proper parts of atoms are a bunch of particles that come together to compose an atom. According to this view, the properties of everything there is—including the proper parts of atoms—supervene on the properties of atoms If this is so, there is nothing wrong in saying that atoms are fundamental particles and that they have proper parts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
