This paper reexamines the historical debate between Leibniz and Newton on the nature of space. According to the traditional reading, Leibniz (in his correspondence with Clarke) produced metaphysical arguments (relying on the Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Principle of Identity of Indiscernibles) in favor of a relational account of space. Newton, according to the traditional account, refuted the metaphysical arguments with the help of an empirical argument based on the bucket experiment. The paper claims that Leibniz's and Newton's arguments cannot be understood apart from the distinct dialectics of their respective positions vis-à-vis Descartes' theory of space and physics. Against the traditional reading, the paper argues that Leibniz and Newton are operating within a different metaphysics and different conceptions of place, and that their respective arguments can largely remain intact without undermining the other philosopher's conception of space. The paper also takes up the task of clarifying the distinction between true and absolute motion, and of explaining the relativity of motion implied by Leibniz's account. The paper finally argues that the two philosophers have different conceptions of the relation between metaphysics and science, and that Leibniz's attempt to base physical theory on an underlying metaphysical account of forces renders his account of physics unstable.
...MoreSimilar Citations
Article
Dyck, Maarten Van;
Verelst, Karin;
(2013)
“Whatever Is Neither Everywhere Nor Anywhere Does Not Exist”: The Concepts of Space and Time in Newton and Leibniz
(/isis/citation/CBB001320861/)
Article
Arthur, Richard T. W.;
(2013)
Leibniz's Theory of Space
(/isis/citation/CBB001320866/)
Chapter
Huggett, Nick;
(2012)
What Did Newton Mean by “Absolute Motion”?
(/isis/citation/CBB001500345/)
Book
Khamara, Edward J.;
(2006)
Space, Time, and Theology in the Leibniz-Newton Controversy
(/isis/citation/CBB000741545/)
Article
Jacquette, Dale;
(2014)
Newton's Metaphysics of Space as God's Emanative Effect
(/isis/citation/CBB001422206/)
Article
Kerszberg, Pierre;
(2013)
Deduction Versus Discourse: Newton and the Cosmic Phenomena
(/isis/citation/CBB001320867/)
Chapter
Garber, Daniel;
(2012)
Leibniz, Newton and Force
(/isis/citation/CBB001500339/)
Book
Ariew, Roger;
(2011)
Descartes among the Scholastics
(/isis/citation/CBB001500336/)
Article
Stephen Howard;
(2017)
Why Did Leibniz Fail to Complete His Dynamics?
(/isis/citation/CBB448929987/)
Article
Christophe Schmit;
(2015)
Les dynamiques de Jean-Jacques Dortous de Mairan
(/isis/citation/CBB695462531/)
Chapter
Delphine Bellis;
(2013)
Empiricism Without Metaphysics: Regius’ Cartesian Natural Philosophy
(/isis/citation/CBB297326434/)
Article
Aaron Spink;
(2018)
The Experimental Physics of Jacques Rohault
(/isis/citation/CBB768305096/)
Article
Palmerino, Carla Rita;
(2011)
The Isomorphism of Space, Time and Matter in Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy
(/isis/citation/CBB001220180/)
Article
Andrew Janiak;
(2015)
Space and Motion in Nature and Scripture: Galileo, Descartes, Newton
(/isis/citation/CBB462811041/)
Chapter
Brading, Katherine;
(2012)
Newton's Law-Constitutive Approach to Bodies: A Response to Descartes
(/isis/citation/CBB001500338/)
Book
Janiak, Andrew;
Schliesser, Erick;
(2012)
Interpreting Newton: Critical Essays
(/isis/citation/CBB001500334/)
Article
Gregory Brown;
(2016)
Did Samuel Clarke Really Disavow Action at a Distance in His Correspondence with Leibniz?: Newton, Clarke, and Bentley on Gravitation and Action at a Distance
(/isis/citation/CBB410182076/)
Article
François Duchesneau;
(2019)
Le recours aux principes architectoniques dans la Dynamica de Leibniz
(/isis/citation/CBB978969993/)
Article
Dmitri Levitin;
(2021)
Isaac Newton’s ‘De gravitatione et aequipondio fluidorum’: its purpose in historical context
(/isis/citation/CBB857612261/)
Article
Kochiras, Hylarie;
(2011)
Gravity's Cause and Substance Counting: Contextualizing the Problems
(/isis/citation/CBB001024153/)
Be the first to comment!