Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-bt4hw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-30T14:33:03.784Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Leibniz on Agential Contingency and Inclining but not Necessitating Reasons

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 September 2022

Juan Garcia
Juan Garcia*
Affiliation:
Philosophy and Religion Department, Wingate University, Wingate, NC, USA
*
Email: j.garcia@wingate.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I argue for a novel interpretation of Leibniz’s conception of the kind of contingency that matters for freedom, which I label ‘agential contingency.’ In brief, an agent is free to the extent that she determines herself to do what she judges to be the best of several considered options that she could have brought about had she concluded that these options were best. I use this novel interpretation to make sense of Leibniz’s doctrine that the reasons that explain free actions are merely inclining and not necessitating.

Keywords

Freedomcontingencyinclining reasonsprinciple of sufficient reason

Information

Type
Article
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 52 , Issue 2 , February 2022 , pp. 149 - 164
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of Canadian Journal of Philosophy

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

References

A Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Edited by der Wissenschaften, Deutsche Akademie. Darmstadt, Leipzig, Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1923–. Cited by series, volume, and page number.Google Scholar
AG Philosophical Essays. Edited and translated by Ariew, Roger and Garber, Daniel. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
CD Causa Dei asserta per justitiam ejus, cum caeteris ejus perfectionibus, cunctisque actionibus conciliatam. 1710. In G 6:439–62. English translation from S 114–45. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
COE “Observations on the Book Concerning the Origin of Evil,” appended to Theodicy (1710). Cited by section number as in G 6:400–36.Google Scholar
CP Confessio Philosophi: Papers Concerning the Problem of Evil, 1671–1678. Edited and translated by Sleigh, Robert C. Jr., Look, B., and Stam, H.. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
DM Discourse on Metaphysics. 1686. In G 4:427–63; English translation from AG 35–68. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
DPG Dissertation on Predestination and Grace. Edited and translated by Murray, Michael J.. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2011. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
G Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Edited by Gerhardt, C. I.. Berlin: Weidmann, 1875–90. Reprinted Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1978. Cited by volume and page number.Google Scholar
GM Leibnizens Mathematische Schriften. 7 vols. Edited by Gerhardt, Carl Immanuel. Berlin: Asher, 1849–63. Cited by volume and page number.Google Scholar
Grua Textes inédits d’après des manuscripts de la Bilbliothèque provinciale d’Hanovre. Edited by Grua, Gaston. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1948. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
LC G. W. Leibniz and Samuel Clarke: Correspondence. Edited by Ariew, Roger. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 2000. Cited by letter and section.Google Scholar
LGR Leibniz on God and Religion. Edited and translated by Strickland, Lloyd. London: Bloomsbury Academy, 2016. Cited by page number.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M Monadology. 1714. Cited by section as in G 6.607–23; English translation from AG 213-225.Google Scholar
NE New Essays Concerning Human Understanding, G 5:41–509; Translated and edited by Remnant, Peter and Bennett, Jonathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
PNG “Principles of Nature and Grace, Based on Reason.” 1714. Cited by sections as in G 6.598–606; translations from AG 206–13.Google Scholar
PT Philosophical Texts. Edited by Woodhouse, Roger and Francks, Richard. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
SLT The Shorter Leibniz Texts. Edited and translated by Strickland, Lloyd. New York: Continuum, 2006. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
T Theodicy. 1710. G 6:102–365; edited by Farrer, Austin; English translation Huggard, E. M.. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1985. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
Ta “Summary of the Controversy Reduced to Formal Arguments,” appended to Theodicy (1710). G:376-87. Cited by page numbers.Google Scholar
UL Correspondance de Bossuet. Edited by Urbain, C. and Levesque, E., 15 vols. new ed. Paris: Hatchett, 1912. Cited by volume and page number.Google Scholar
CT Saint Thomas Aquinas, Corpus Thomisticus: Sancti Thomae de Aquino Opera Omnia. Edited by Enrique Alarcon. www.corpusthomisticum.org/iopera.html.Google Scholar
ST Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologicae. In CT. Cited by part, question, and article numbers.Google Scholar
Adams, Robert. 1994. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Chloe. 2017. “Leibniz and Lewis on Modal Metaphysics and Fatalism.” Quaestiones Disputatoe 7 (2): 72–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, L. M. Donald. 2000. “Leibniz on Contingent Conceptual Truths and the Arnauld Correspondence.” Studia Leibnitiana 32 (2): 191–214.Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, David. 1988. “Freedom, Contingency, and Things Possible in Themselves.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 49 (1): 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burms, Arnold, and De Dijn, Herman. 1979. “Freedom and Logical Contingency in Leibniz.” Studia Leibnitiana 11 (1): 124–33.Google Scholar
Curley, E. 1972. “The Root of Contingency.” In Leibniz: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Frankfurt, Harry G.. Notre Dame, ID: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Fischer, John Martin, and Ravizza, Mark. 1998. Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, Lois. 1984. “Being Able to Do Otherwise: Leibniz on Freedom and Contingency.” Studia Leibnitiana 16: 45–59.Google Scholar
Forman, David. 2008. “Free Will and the Freedom of the Sage in Leibniz and the Stoics.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 25 (3): 203–19.Google Scholar
Garcia, Juan. 2019. “Leibniz on Agential Contingency and Explanation of Rational Action.” Studia Leibnitiana 51 (1): 76–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, V. Michael. 2013. Leibniz, God, and Necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, V. Michael. 1999. “Leibniz on God’s Knowledge of Counterfactuals.” The Philosophical Review 108 (3): 317–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, Graeme. 1981. “Leibniz and the ‘Super-Essentialist’ Misunderstanding.” Studia Leibnitiana 13 (1): 123–32.Google Scholar
Imlay, A. Robert. 2002. “Leibniz on Freedom of the Will: A Vindication.” Studia Leibnitiana 34 (1): 81–90.Google Scholar
Jolley, Nicholas. 2005. Leibniz. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2018. “Leibniz’s Ontology of Force.” Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 8: 189–224.Google Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2017. Leibniz on Causation and Agency. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2014. “Leibniz’s Twofold Gap between Moral Knowledge and Motivation.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22 (4): 748–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, Bonnie. 1995. Virtues of The Will: The Transformation of Ethics in the Late Thirteenth Century. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Lagerlund, Henrik, and Myrdal, Peter. 2006. “Possible Worlds and the Nature of Choice in Leibniz.” Studia Leibnitiana 38/39 (2): 156–76.Google Scholar
Lin, Martin. 2012. “Rationalism and Necessitarianism.” Noûs 46 (3): 418–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodzinski, Don. 1994. “Leibnizian Freedom and Superessentialism.” Studia Leibnitiana 26 (2): 163–86.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, O. Arthur. (1936) 1960. The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mates, Benson. 1972. “Individuals and Modality in the Philosophy of Leibniz.” Studia Leibnitiana IV: 81–118.Google Scholar
McDonough, K. Jeffrey. 2018. “Freedom and Contingency.” In The Oxford Handbook of Leibniz, edited by Antognazza, Maria Rosa, 87–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McNamara, Paul. 1990. “Leibniz on Creation, Contingency and Per-Se Modality.” Studia Leibnitiana 22 (1): 29–47.Google Scholar
Mondadori, Fabrizio. 1985. “Understanding Superessentialism.” Studia Leibnitiana XVII: 162–90.Google Scholar
Mondadori, Fabrizio. 1975. “Leibniz and the Doctrine of Inter-World Identity.” Studia Leibnitiana 7 (1): 21–57.Google Scholar
Mondadori, Fabrizio. 1973. “Reference, Essentialism, and Modality in Leibniz’s Metaphysics.” Studia Leibnitiana 5 (1): 74–101.Google Scholar
Murray, Michael J. 2005. “Spontaneity and Freedom in Leibniz.” In Leibniz: Nature and Freedom, edited by Rutherford, Donald and Cover, Jan A., 194–216. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Michael J. 2004. “Pre-Leibnizian Moral Necessity.” The Leibniz Review 14: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Michael J. 1996. "Intellect, Will, and Freedom: Leibniz and His Precursors." The Leibniz Review 6: 25–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plantinga, Alvin. 1974. The Nature of Necessity. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Torralba, Jose Maria. 2005. “La Libertad Posible Acerca de la Nocion Leibniziana de Inclinar sin Necesidad.” Anuario Filosofico 38 (1): 279–312.Google Scholar
A Sämtliche Schriften und Briefe. Edited by der Wissenschaften, Deutsche Akademie. Darmstadt, Leipzig, Berlin: Akademie Verlag, 1923–. Cited by series, volume, and page number.Google Scholar
AG Philosophical Essays. Edited and translated by Ariew, Roger and Garber, Daniel. Indianapolis: Hackett, 1989. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
CD Causa Dei asserta per justitiam ejus, cum caeteris ejus perfectionibus, cunctisque actionibus conciliatam. 1710. In G 6:439–62. English translation from S 114–45. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
COE “Observations on the Book Concerning the Origin of Evil,” appended to Theodicy (1710). Cited by section number as in G 6:400–36.Google Scholar
CP Confessio Philosophi: Papers Concerning the Problem of Evil, 1671–1678. Edited and translated by Sleigh, Robert C. Jr., Look, B., and Stam, H.. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2005.Google Scholar
DM Discourse on Metaphysics. 1686. In G 4:427–63; English translation from AG 35–68. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
DPG Dissertation on Predestination and Grace. Edited and translated by Murray, Michael J.. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2011. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
G Die philosophischen Schriften von Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz. Edited by Gerhardt, C. I.. Berlin: Weidmann, 1875–90. Reprinted Hildesheim: Georg Olms, 1978. Cited by volume and page number.Google Scholar
GM Leibnizens Mathematische Schriften. 7 vols. Edited by Gerhardt, Carl Immanuel. Berlin: Asher, 1849–63. Cited by volume and page number.Google Scholar
Grua Textes inédits d’après des manuscripts de la Bilbliothèque provinciale d’Hanovre. Edited by Grua, Gaston. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1948. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
LC G. W. Leibniz and Samuel Clarke: Correspondence. Edited by Ariew, Roger. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett, 2000. Cited by letter and section.Google Scholar
LGR Leibniz on God and Religion. Edited and translated by Strickland, Lloyd. London: Bloomsbury Academy, 2016. Cited by page number.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
M Monadology. 1714. Cited by section as in G 6.607–23; English translation from AG 213-225.Google Scholar
NE New Essays Concerning Human Understanding, G 5:41–509; Translated and edited by Remnant, Peter and Bennett, Jonathan. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
PNG “Principles of Nature and Grace, Based on Reason.” 1714. Cited by sections as in G 6.598–606; translations from AG 206–13.Google Scholar
PT Philosophical Texts. Edited by Woodhouse, Roger and Francks, Richard. New York: Oxford University Press, 1988. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
SLT The Shorter Leibniz Texts. Edited and translated by Strickland, Lloyd. New York: Continuum, 2006. Cited by page number.Google Scholar
T Theodicy. 1710. G 6:102–365; edited by Farrer, Austin; English translation Huggard, E. M.. La Salle, IL: Open Court, 1985. Cited by section number.Google Scholar
Ta “Summary of the Controversy Reduced to Formal Arguments,” appended to Theodicy (1710). G:376-87. Cited by page numbers.Google Scholar
UL Correspondance de Bossuet. Edited by Urbain, C. and Levesque, E., 15 vols. new ed. Paris: Hatchett, 1912. Cited by volume and page number.Google Scholar
CT Saint Thomas Aquinas, Corpus Thomisticus: Sancti Thomae de Aquino Opera Omnia. Edited by Enrique Alarcon. www.corpusthomisticum.org/iopera.html.Google Scholar
ST Saint Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologicae. In CT. Cited by part, question, and article numbers.Google Scholar
Adams, Robert. 1994. Leibniz: Determinist, Theist, Idealist. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Armstrong, Chloe. 2017. “Leibniz and Lewis on Modal Metaphysics and Fatalism.” Quaestiones Disputatoe 7 (2): 72–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baxter, L. M. Donald. 2000. “Leibniz on Contingent Conceptual Truths and the Arnauld Correspondence.” Studia Leibnitiana 32 (2): 191–214.Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, David. 1988. “Freedom, Contingency, and Things Possible in Themselves.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 49 (1): 81–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burms, Arnold, and De Dijn, Herman. 1979. “Freedom and Logical Contingency in Leibniz.” Studia Leibnitiana 11 (1): 124–33.Google Scholar
Curley, E. 1972. “The Root of Contingency.” In Leibniz: A Collection of Critical Essays, edited by Frankfurt, Harry G.. Notre Dame, ID: University of Notre Dame.Google Scholar
Fischer, John Martin, and Ravizza, Mark. 1998. Responsibility and Control: A Theory of Moral Responsibility. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankel, Lois. 1984. “Being Able to Do Otherwise: Leibniz on Freedom and Contingency.” Studia Leibnitiana 16: 45–59.Google Scholar
Forman, David. 2008. “Free Will and the Freedom of the Sage in Leibniz and the Stoics.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 25 (3): 203–19.Google Scholar
Garcia, Juan. 2019. “Leibniz on Agential Contingency and Explanation of Rational Action.” Studia Leibnitiana 51 (1): 76–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Griffin, V. Michael. 2013. Leibniz, God, and Necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Griffin, V. Michael. 1999. “Leibniz on God’s Knowledge of Counterfactuals.” The Philosophical Review 108 (3): 317–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunter, Graeme. 1981. “Leibniz and the ‘Super-Essentialist’ Misunderstanding.” Studia Leibnitiana 13 (1): 123–32.Google Scholar
Imlay, A. Robert. 2002. “Leibniz on Freedom of the Will: A Vindication.” Studia Leibnitiana 34 (1): 81–90.Google Scholar
Jolley, Nicholas. 2005. Leibniz. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2018. “Leibniz’s Ontology of Force.” Oxford Studies in Early Modern Philosophy 8: 189–224.Google Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2017. Leibniz on Causation and Agency. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jorati, Julia. 2014. “Leibniz’s Twofold Gap between Moral Knowledge and Motivation.” British Journal for the History of Philosophy 22 (4): 748–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kent, Bonnie. 1995. Virtues of The Will: The Transformation of Ethics in the Late Thirteenth Century. Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.Google Scholar
Lagerlund, Henrik, and Myrdal, Peter. 2006. “Possible Worlds and the Nature of Choice in Leibniz.” Studia Leibnitiana 38/39 (2): 156–76.Google Scholar
Lin, Martin. 2012. “Rationalism and Necessitarianism.” Noûs 46 (3): 418–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lodzinski, Don. 1994. “Leibnizian Freedom and Superessentialism.” Studia Leibnitiana 26 (2): 163–86.Google Scholar
Lovejoy, O. Arthur. (1936) 1960. The Great Chain of Being: A Study of the History of an Idea. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Mates, Benson. 1972. “Individuals and Modality in the Philosophy of Leibniz.” Studia Leibnitiana IV: 81–118.Google Scholar
McDonough, K. Jeffrey. 2018. “Freedom and Contingency.” In The Oxford Handbook of Leibniz, edited by Antognazza, Maria Rosa, 87–100. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McNamara, Paul. 1990. “Leibniz on Creation, Contingency and Per-Se Modality.” Studia Leibnitiana 22 (1): 29–47.Google Scholar
Mondadori, Fabrizio. 1985. “Understanding Superessentialism.” Studia Leibnitiana XVII: 162–90.Google Scholar
Mondadori, Fabrizio. 1975. “Leibniz and the Doctrine of Inter-World Identity.” Studia Leibnitiana 7 (1): 21–57.Google Scholar
Mondadori, Fabrizio. 1973. “Reference, Essentialism, and Modality in Leibniz’s Metaphysics.” Studia Leibnitiana 5 (1): 74–101.Google Scholar
Murray, Michael J. 2005. “Spontaneity and Freedom in Leibniz.” In Leibniz: Nature and Freedom, edited by Rutherford, Donald and Cover, Jan A., 194–216. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Michael J. 2004. “Pre-Leibnizian Moral Necessity.” The Leibniz Review 14: 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, Michael J. 1996. "Intellect, Will, and Freedom: Leibniz and His Precursors." The Leibniz Review 6: 25–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plantinga, Alvin. 1974. The Nature of Necessity. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Torralba, Jose Maria. 2005. “La Libertad Posible Acerca de la Nocion Leibniziana de Inclinar sin Necesidad.” Anuario Filosofico 38 (1): 279–312.Google Scholar