On 9/17/2012 8:47 AM, Roger Clough wrote:
Hi Stephen P. King

" Descartes believed in only TWO kinds of substance: material body, which is defined by extension,
and mental substance, which is defined by thought, which, in this context, is more 
or less equivalent to consciousness."

" For Spinoza, there is only ONE substance, the existence of which is demonstrated by a version of
the ontological argument, which is thought of as being both God and Nature."
Leibniz was not satisfied by this conception of divine substance, at least in part because it confines God to what actually exists. For Leibniz, God contains within himself all possibilities, not just the actual world: this latter is just that maximal set of possibilities that he has best reason to actualize. Leibniz acknowledges created SUBSTANCES, though they are very intimately dependent on God.
In the Discourse on Metaphysics, (Section 14), he says:
it is clear that created SUBSTANCES depend on God, who conserves them and indeed who produces them
continuously by a kind of emanation, just as we produce our thoughts. (1998: 

Roger Clough, rclo...@verizon.net
Leibniz would say, "If there's no God, we'd have to invent him
so that everything could function."
   Hi Roger,

We agree on this. I am trying to look at finer details of the "substance" idea.




You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to