 Welcome to this course on aspects on western philosophy module 13 lecture 13, this lecture is going to be on one very important modern philosopher Leibniz. Leibniz is quite well known outside the philosophical circles as a mathematician, as a logician, as a diplomat but more primarily as a mathematician. So, this lecture would be covering the following topics. We will discuss Leibniz monadology, which is one of the central concepts in his philosophy or one of the most important theoretical contributions of Leibniz to modern philosophy is his monadology. And with the after explaining this we will try to see the mind body problem, which lies at the center of modern philosophy. We have seen that this problem of mind body dualism or the relationship between the mind and the body is at the center of all philosophical contemplations right from Descartes. So, Descartes has his theory his version of or his account of this relationship, then we had seen how Spinoza also encounters this problem. And now we see with this monadology how Leibniz is going to encounter and give an account of his views about the mind body relationship. Then we will also see the concept of God, which is another very important concept with which almost all the modern philosophers are preoccupied with. And then the most important contribution or rather I would rather say that this concept the concept of pre-established harmony is probably what makes Leibniz one of the very important philosophers in modern period. So, we will see a basic outline of his life and career he is primarily as I already mentioned primarily known as an outstanding mathematician and born in July 1646 in Leibniz and 1675 he laid the foundation of the differential or integral calculus along with Newton he is known as the one who has laid the foundation of this differential calculus. And this period 1772 to 76 he had visited several places and also had met two important philosophers Malbranje and Spinoza. Particularly Spinoza because it is Leibniz who succeeds Spinoza in the rationalistic school of thought. And Spinoza influence on Leibniz philosophy is tremendous phenomenal influence Leibniz himself has accepted it, but at the same time Leibniz also maintained a safe distance from Spinoza who held very unorthodox views about God and God world relationship. We have already discussed this in the previous lecture. So, I am not going to elaborate upon that aspect and he died in November 1417 16 in Hanover. So, when we talk about the carrier influences on Leibniz he had his early education in Germany in a neo-scholastic Aristotelian philosophy. So, it is very interesting to see the journey from starting from a neo-scholastic Aristotelian philosophy when he went to Paris was introduced to Cartesianism and the materialism of Ghazendi. So, these two are again very important influences on his philosophy particularly Descartes. Descartes influenced him a lot he was actually attracted by Descartes philosophy during the spirit. And then he as I already mentioned Spinoza in 1676 I mean there were several times several locations he met Spinoza and very important in his career, but he refused to admit the significant the tremendous influence Spinoza had on his life and work. There are reasons for that not really philosophical reasons, but mostly political reasons for that. And when we take a look at the overview of Leibniz's philosophy he began with the problem of substance like Descartes and Spinoza like all the all his predecessors in the modern philosophy. It is with the problem of substance he also began. And as we have already seen that this problem the problem of substance is something which the modern philosophers have inherited from the scholastic thinkers. And we know that you know we have already seen in previous lectures how his predecessors Descartes and Spinoza have come up with their own accounts of the substance different accounts of mind body relationship and the number of substances. All these were issues with which all the modern philosophers and their followers and disciples have been discussing and dealt with. Wanted to reconcile the scholastic speculative theology with rational modern philosophy and science. See one important aspect about I have already mentioned it very briefly in the beginning. One important aspect of Leibniz's philosophy is that or rather his life is that though he had a very promising sort of young scholar he was a very promising young scholar in philosophy. And was offered several teaching positions he instead prefer to be a diplomat have a political career and prefer to be a diplomat. So, very interesting in that sense and again this very notion of reconciliation which should be there in the blood of a diplomat is there in the blood of Leibniz. So, in Leibniz's philosophy is rather preoccupied with this notion of harmony harmonizing differences. First of all you accept differences there are different things. So, Leibniz's philosophy is known as monadology which recognizes a plurality of different substances monads. Each one is autonomous each one is independent. So, you have a plurality of substances you recognize their differences no two monads are alike are the same. But at the same time then there is a craving for reconciling to bring them together. Because you cannot operate with innumerable infinite number of discrete and unconnected substances you need to establish a kind of unity. But then once you separate them how do you unify them Spinoza had an answer to this question. He unified everything with a concept of God with a concept of substance Spinoza was trying to bring everything into one fold the concept of God. Every entity every object in this universe is a modification of that according to Spinoza. But Leibniz was not ready to accept this what is he wanted to maintain the differences at the same time he wants to unify. And this unity was brought in with the establishment of or rather with a notion of a pre-establish harmony and harmony which is pre-established by God. So, with the concept of God reconciliation was made possible. So, this is what he tries to do every field he had this craving to reconcile theology on the one hand the scholastic theology on the one hand. And the modern science on the other hand apparently to opposing conflicting traditions he held the view that the universe is a harmonious hall governed by mathematical and logical principles. So, this universe the conception of the universe as a harmonious all that is again. So, let us go back to the original problem with regard to the number of substances. And here we start with Descartes. Descartes as we have seen maintains God as the only independent substance and mind and body are dependent substances they depend on God. And for mind Descartes has attributed thinking as its attribute and for body extension is the attribute according to Descartes. And they remain separated they are separated from each other though they depend on God they do not depend they are mutually independent, but they depend on God. But when you come to Spinoza there is only one substance I have already explained this extension and thinking are attributes of God to among the infinite number of attributes they are and he proposes a kind of pantheistic view which we have already discussed in the previous lecture. So, now let us say what Leibniz says about Descartes the extension is the attribute of matter and thinking of mind we have already seen this separation of mind and body and Spinoza attempts to reestablish unity both are attributes of God. Leibniz concerns are he accepts Descartes mechanistic explanation see with this dualism with the separation of mind from body Descartes has achieved one thing what is it that you know you can explain the workings of the material universe independent of a mental a psychic world. So, he could envisage that the world the material world is operated or it is functioned on the basis of certain mechanical laws it is a domain of its own it is an independent autonomous domain. So, this is very useful for the development of modern science this philosophy of separate domain for natural sciences independent of psychic and other domains and Leibniz to accepts this mechanistic explanation of the physical world, but at the same time he found that the underlying dualism Descartes could establish this kind of a mechanistic explanation he could come up with this mechanistic explanation on the basis of the dualism he maintained between body and mind by separating mind from body. And Leibniz found that this is inherently problematic this needs to be reconciled you cannot lie them separate. So, he was unhappy with again when you come to Spinoza who united them, but he was unhappy with Spinoza who does not recognize the reality of individuals. So, Spinoza does not recognize the reality of individuals he unifies everything he makes everything the aspect of God a modic mode of God or a modification of God. So, this was also not acceptable and he also opposes Spinoza for rejecting teleology or as we have already seen in the previous lecture for Spinoza everything that happens happens naturally happens necessarily the necessity of God the principle of God makes possible everything happens. So, there is no freedom of will there is no teleology or purpose everything happens as a matter of necessity in Spinoza this is something which was not acceptable for Leibniz who says that working for ends is important in practical life. So, when we do anything see particularly for example, Leibniz was a diplomat and for him the practical concern or doing things designing things or acting according to certain purposes in mind is very important. So, he was not very happy with this total rejection of teleology from the scheme of things done by Spinoza also found that the idea of substance that is extended and unextended as a contradiction. See for example, in Spinoza you would find that God extension and thinking are the attributes of God the same one and the same substance. So, something which is unextended something which is thinking is necessarily unextended and something which is extended can never think. So, when you attribute extension and thought to the same substance according to Leibniz this leads to a kind of contradiction. So, this is another issue which Leibniz had with Spinoza and particularly when you come to Descartes matter as extended substance it is passive and inert it is not internally inert and receive motion from outside. According to Leibniz extension cannot be the attribute of substance extension involves plurality hence only belong to an aggregate of substances this is his view each single substance must be unextended according to him. So, there is a kind of atomism which Leibniz is trying to propose. So, the three most important philosophers or philosophical theories which probably shaped Leibnizian monadology are number one Plato, Plato's idealism Plato's notion that reality is eternal. So, mono arts are eternal number two democratic atomism there are innumerable number of atoms reality is constituted of innumerable number of atoms and number three is Aristotle we will come to that slightly later. So, now here he comes up with a very important concept which is actually the central notion of monadology the concept of force the doctrine of force it begins with Descartes. Descartes says that the quantity of motion is constant in this universe, but Leibniz says that what happens when bodies come to rest and bodies begin to move motion seems to be lost and gain how is it possible how can motion be lost and gained can we say that motion seems to be lost and gain then it violates the principle of continuity the principle of continuity says that nature makes no leaps. So, that is not possible then what is it there should be a ground of motion something more fundamental than motion which Descartes talks about what is that fundamental thing that is what he calls force or conatus. So, it is a force the tendency of the body to move or to continue its motion and this force I repeat the force which is the tendency of a body to move or to continue its motion which is constant in quantity according to him. So, from motion to force and it is not extension, but force according to Leibniz every substance is an expression of force. So, it is with the notion of force Leibniz would define the very nature of substance every substance is an expression of force body or matter is equated with this force and un-next center center of force everything even body even bodies or matter is equated with the force and force is necessarily un-extended it is an un-extended center of force matter is not a mere passier lump of extended substance, but is a force see I have already mentioned about Democritus. Democritus talks about atoms the atoms out of which the universe is made up of, but these atoms of Democritus are material in nature they are physical and for Descartes even these atoms are un-extended they are to be understood in terms of force. So, everything that whatever atoms exist are nothing, but expressions of different ways in which force get expressed. So, atoms are expressions sorry this matter whatever matter whatever body we have they are nothing, but expressions of force. So, not a mere lump of passive lump of extended substance, but is a force and force does not exist by virtue of extension, but extension exist by virtue of body or force. So, he reverses the entire thing and extension is the phenomenal way in which matter appears to us. So, that is not something which constitutes matter that is not something which is the essence of matter as Descartes would assert, but it is the phenomenal way in which matter appears to us and it is not extension, but force is the essential attribute of matter and nothing substantial or primary principle is made up of parts. See if something is absolutely real, if something is substantially real, if something is primary then that object should be simple there is a very well established logical theory logical principle which almost all philosophers accept including Pinoza also talks about it. And Leibniz also accepts it true indivisible unit must be un-extended if that is a case if the primary substantial entity should not be made up of part should be simple then it must be un-extended. Primary principle must be a simple indivisible reality and Descartes says that existence of body presupposes extension, Leibniz says that extension presupposes the existence of bodies then what is force? We have been talking about force and we saw that force lies at the foundation of everything. It is the foundational principle of matter, it is the foundational principle of everything that exist, if that is a case the source or foundation of the mechanical world is to be understood as force according to Leibniz. It is the ground of extension of the body, it is the extension presupposes in the body and aspect that extends itself. So, it is as I have already mentioned it is more primary to the extension which Descartes thought constitutes the essence of body because extension presupposes in body an aspect that extends itself and that is force. The nature of the body it is a very nature of the body in that sense the various sense that spreads itself out and continues itself. So, something which enables the very nature of that body to spread itself and continues to exist is what the force is. The property of the body oint which the body appears as limited or as matter. So, it is the essential aspect it is the essence it is the nature and it is the essential property. Again when you talk about reality of force every unit of force is an indivisible union of soul and matter. So, he makes another leap here he has been talking about atoms and the force and all those things it appears to be you know simple entities. So, what is it? So, what does it constitute? Even he talks about body and he says that what lies at the foundation of body is this force then what is it? So, he says that in force the reality of force is constitutive of what can be understood as an indivisible union of soul and matter. It is a union of activity and passivity mind and body in one sense we can say. A union of activity and passivity and organizing self determining purposes force and again it limits itself it has the power of resistance. So, all these things qualify what is to be understood as force and at the same time Leibniz says that unlike his immediate predecessor Spinoza who tries to unify everything under the concept of substance by proclaiming that substance encompasses the entire world entire universe. Leibniz recognizes a plurality of forces there are infinite number of forces infinite number of particular individual substances. So, substance is not one homogeneous entity, but infinite number of homogeneous entities we can say infinite number of autonomous entities. So, each force is a substance and there are innumerable number of forces infinite number of dynamic units each unit is immaterial, unextended and simple immaterial because they are not constitute of matter in the sense that they are unextended and then they are simple which means they cannot be divided further. So, the principle of atomism is implicit in it, but this atom is a kind of metaphysical atom it is not a physical atom it is a metaphysical atom each substance is a union of matter and soul. So, in one sense we can say that you know the two principles which traditional philosophy things are so fundamental in understanding the concept of being mind body and soul. So, Leibniz is trying to accommodate these fundamental principles into one single entity known as substance or monad which is a union of matter and soul and it is a metaphysical point not physical or mathematical it is a metaphysical point. Body is a plurality of simple forces and the human soul is also such a metaphysical point. So, it is very interesting here Leibniz says that everything in this universe is composed of or this entire universe is composed of a plurality of infinite number of such forces, such metaphysical points, such metaphysical atoms. If that is the case then what about the body and what about the soul, what about things in this world, what about mountains and trees and stones and rocks and other things are they also having souls. Yes apparently yes because everything that exists everything that is present here is constitutive of monads and each monad is a union of body and soul. If each monad is a union of body and soul and it is out of monads that everything is constituted everything is constructed then everything in this universe should have body and soul very interesting. The mind body problem now comes back in a very different fashion in Leibniz philosophy. Each monad is a union of matter and soul each is a spiritual or psychic force what is true for one monad is true for all. So, he responds to that craving for unity. So, what is true for one monad should be true for all monads. So, the entirety of reality is brought into this concept of monad. The same principle that expresses itself in the mind of man is active in body plant and animal and everything in this universe. So, it is the same principle. So, harmonizing I have mentioned earlier that this craving for harmony is so central to all these philosophers and it is particularly more visible in Leibniz and it is very interesting in Leibniz because Leibniz on the one hand maintains a pluralism pluralism of forces a pluralism of monads metaphysical points. And on the other hand he explains that there is a unity there is a harmony all matter is animate and what is then mind opposes the traditional notions that equates mind with consciousness which is quite commonsensical. It is a dominant Cartesian view of conceiving mind as or equating mind with consciousness as Descartes says you know every mind thinks mind even thinks when it goes to sleep. So, there is not a moment in which the mind ceases to think essentially what Leibniz says is that in opposing all these accepted views about mind and consciousness and their relationship Leibniz asserts that mind is essentially unconscious consist of perceptions and tendencies and there are clear and obscure perceptions clearness and distinctness in different monads. So, minds since every monad is a union of soul and body every monad has this perception the ability to perceive, but the clarity the clearness and distinctness vary from monad to monad that makes this difference in the clarity and distinctiveness makes one monad different from another every monad is capable of perception because there is mind and body in every monad. So, let us see a hierarchy. So, it begins with the plants in the bottom. So, the plants everything is obscure and confused as if in sleep a kind of tomato state, but slightly above you have animals slightly above perception with memory which is consciousness and in the case of humans we go still above there is clearer consciousness self-consciousness or a perception and knowledge of the inner state all these things are present in the case of man, but fundamentally all are constitutive of monads in the case of man the consciousness is clearer in the case of animals the consciousness is not really clear, but there is some consciousness is present, but in the case of plants it is completely in a dormant state or obscure and confused. And in this context monadology is introduced every monad has the power of perception or representation because every monad is a union of mind and body. So, the power of perception or representation every monad perceives or represents and expresses the entire universe. This is the beauty of lamination system he says that every monad is a universe in itself it is absolutely independent of other monads and each monad represents perceives the entire universe each is a world in a miniature a microcosm and a living mirror of the entire universe. So, then every body feels everything that occurs in the entire universe. So, there is the fundamental unity and harmony is underlined every monad perceives and represents not just what is immediately around it, but the entire universe. So, on the one hand it is unique and distinct, but on the other hand it is like all other monads addressing the question of unity. And here comes the pluralism there are infinite number of different monads what you mean by infinite number of in what sense can you say that one monad is different from another. On the one hand it is a stated that each monad is a union of body and mind body and soul. If that is the case in what sense one monad is different from other each monad represents the universe in its own way. So, they represent the universe differently as I mentioned the clearness the clarity and the distinctiveness of perception and representation vary from monad to monad and there is a gradation there is a hierarchy each from its own point of view different in terms of degrees of clearness the perspective of each monad is limited no two monads mirror the universe in the same way. If they do that then they are not two they are one and the same they form a hierarchy and this is another very important aspect of Librarian philosophy the hierarchy of monads. Monads differ in terms of clearness and perception I have already explained this from the lowest to the highest monad in terms of clearness or conscious the lowest will have the most obscure the dullest form of perception and representation just above that the level of consciousness is slightly high just above that further high and like that it goes it takes us to a gradation a kind of hierarchy from lover to the from plants to animals to man a hierarchy of monads no lapses in nature it is a continuous line of differences in clarity there is no lapses in between one after the other it goes up and up and up from the dullest piece of ignorant matter to God and God is the highest the highest monad the perfect monad the pure activity which is the monad of all monads again the entire universe is constituted of an infinite number of individual existences which are spiritual entities I have already explained this as I mentioned earlier I am just going to elaborate it a little bit here that they are like atoms of democracies infinite in number and homogenous democracies says that there are infinite number of atoms each one is homogenous like that the monads are also independent of each other and homogenous but they are not material but metaphysical. So, that is the way he is different from Leibnizian monad is different from the democratic atom they are like eternal like Plato's ideas but not outside of things Plato's ideas are outside they are transcendent but for him they are not they are here they are here they are in things as proposed by Aristotle and another very important aspect is monads are windowless every monad is windowless homogenous unit not determined from without every monad is a unit a universe in miniature as I have already mentioned autonomous universe in miniature which is not determined from without but nothing can enter inside it from outside and nothing can be in the monad which has not always been there. So, monad is a self sufficient unit always nothing can ever come into it that is not in it now and everything it is to be is potential or implicit in it this is what is called as a principle of continuity. So, every monad is a self sufficient unit a self sufficient universe in miniature and now he talks about evolution of honnets every monad the process of evolution. So, there should be some teleology some which Leibniz was complaining about Spinoza Leibniz complained about Spinoza was that Spinoza system would not leave any room for any purpose or teleology though of course, Spinoza talks about some purpose human mind as a purpose to know God to be one with God. But again you know he had a system which relies more on the concept of necessity than on freedom. But here Leibniz would like to accommodate this the notion of teleology every monad is in the process of evolution in this process each monad realizes it is nature this process is controlled with inner necessity and not externally because each monad is been told us each monad passes through a series of stages of evolution goes up and up each stage an unfolding of what is implicit in it. So, this is very important because it does not gain anything from outside as an impetus for evolution, but every process of evolution is nothing but an unfolding of what is already there inside each monad. So, this in this through this process of unfolding of its own potentials unfolding of implicit potentials monads will go up and up in the scale of evolution. And nothing in the monad is lost in this process nothing new is gained as well everything that was there was preserved in the later stages future stages are predetermined in the earlier ones and this is called the doctrine of pre-formation nothing is lost and nothing new is gained windowlessness every monad Lebanese says is charged with the past and is big with the future charged with the past because nothing is lost everything is preserved nothing is lost from the past everything is preserved and nothing is gained in future, but only unfolded in future what happens is that it unfolds what is already implicitly present. So, it is big with the future charged with the past and big with the future and this is called as the doctrine of pre-formation or the encasement theory. Now what about the organic and inorganic bodies I have already raised this issue you are talking about minds there are entities with minds, but there are entities apparently which do not have any minds for example rocks chairs tables what about them. So, here says that in organisms there is a central monad or a queen monad which functions like a unifying force which functions like a regulating force which is a purpose. So, which gives the direction for all other monads or rather to put it in other words which organizes the monads. Central monad is the soul the central monad represents the picture of the entire body it is the guiding principle of the monads surrounding it. On the other hand inorganic bodies are not centralized by a queen monad there is no queen monad to centralize it to organize it they consist of mere mass or aggregation of monads there is no union of monads and it is in this sense now we come to the mind body problem. So, Leibniz would never accept interactionism because monads are windowless and they cannot interact there is not acted upon from without everything that happens to a monad is nothing but only unfolding of what is inherently present. There cannot be a causal interaction because causal interaction is possible then it violates the principle of autonomy of monads then it implies that an autonomous monad is being cost to something is cost on it from something outside of it which is impossible. The harmony between mind and body it is here Leibniz introduces the most important concept of his theoretical framework the pre-established harmony to explain this he has been talking about the hierarchy of monads he has been talking about mind and body problems. Now, how do you explain this apparent interaction between mind and body a problem which actually worried the caught a lot and this interactionism is not a very satisfactory response or a reply to the problem and in Spinoza was trying to sort of resolve it with this pantheism which was also not acceptable for Leibniz and many others. Now, Leibniz comes up with a solution which an apparent solution to this problem the harmony between mind and body is pre-established by God. So, the notion of pre-established harmony to explain the relationship between mental and physical realms God arranged the minds and bodies from the very beginning in such a way that they shall go together the soul and the body are in relation of harmony a pre-established they are not interrelated in the sense that one causes certain movements in the other. See when I want to move my hand for example, when I want to raise my hand my mind wants it and my body does it my hand goes up, but this is where you know I sort of have a tendency to ascribe a kind of causal relationship something which in my mind a will in the mind causes a motion in the body. This is the normal interactionism which is not acceptable for various reasons for logical reasons primarily and he says that this is because of the harmony that is pre-established which is there in the universe. We will explain it harmony is established by God and what is pre-established harmony a parallelism or concomitance between the mental and physical states they run parallel there is a kind of concomitance one parallel to the other does not mean that they are interrelated. So, whatever happens here there is a corresponding thing happens here as well, but that does not mean that this has caused this they just happen together or they just happen one after another and who made them happen one after another God that harmony is pre-established. The body is the material expression of the soul corresponding to the force in matter there is conscious activity or will and again souls act according to the loss of final causes by means of desire ends and means which are psychic and bodies act according to the loss of efficient causes or motions which are mechanical. So, in one sense the Cartesian dualism is maintained which says that there are two different principles or laws that regulate these two domains, but then the same problem which Descartes faced if the two domains are regulated and controlled by two different set of norms and rules then how do they interact and Descartes faced lot of troubles in explaining this and what Leibniz says is that the harmony between the two independent autonomous domains is something which is pre-established by God. The picture of the universe is an organic unity in an organism each part has its function all manettes act together like the parts of an organism each monad has its specific function to perform every state in a monad is the effect of the preceding state in it and each state of a monad acts in unison with the states of all the other monads due to the pre-established harmony. So, with the theory of the doctrine of pre-established harmony Leibniz resolves many of these problems which his predecessors were rather facing of course he faces his own problems. So, the order of the universe that the universe exhibits is explained with this universe exhibits an order and uniformity everything in nature can be mechanically explained causal order between things the universe functions like a causal chain everything is causally related, but causality monodology rejects this causality the notion of causality is cannot be accommodated it rejects the idea of external cause no cause from without causation means concomitant changes. So, some change happens here corresponding change happens here as well does not mean that this is produced that they happens concurrently causation means a harmonious action of the parts not that one causes the other, but they act together. The harmony is due to the pre-established harmony which is established by God and the God has arranged monads in such a way that they work without any external interference from other monads or from God even the order and design in the universe presupposes a higher reason. This is how we establishes the existence of God, God is the ultimate cause of all occurrences the source of mechanics lies in metaphysics. So, everything ultimately everything will be converged to this idea of God everything is made significant and meaningful with the help of this guiding principle God. Since all clocks keep time with each other without any causal interaction there must have been a single outside cause that regulated all of them. So, that regulation is the pre-established harmony. So, here mechanism is reconciled with theology harmony of religion and reason harmony between the psychic physical kingdom of nature and the moral kingdom of grace. The universal principles of physics and mechanics presupposes a divine purpose which is the purpose of God the purpose is to harmonize. They are not like laws of logic or mathematics their existence depends on utility and their ground is the wisdom of God and God has chosen them as ways of realizing his purpose. This is primarily because there is a notion of harmony. harmony between man's reason and God's reason between man's purpose and God's purpose between physical kingdom and the kingdom of grace which I have already explained and between God the builder of the machine of the universe and God the monarch of the divine spiritual state and God according to him as I already mentioned is the highest monad he is the monad of monads. The principle of continuity demands according to Leibniz the principle of continuity demands that there should be a highest monad at the end of the series of forces he is the cause of the monads and order and harmony of nature call for a harmonizer and that is God the eternal and necessary truths like the truths of logic and geometry presuppose an eternal intellect in which to exist and God is an individual monad person also transcends all monads the supernatural and super rational monad the most perfect and the most real being hence no changes or undergoes evolution possesses perfect knowledge he sees all things all at a glance. So, in one sense we can see that Leibniz was has succeeded in appeasing the church appeasing the catholic church though his concept of God if you follow the logical consequences is not really exactly as same as the God of the theologian, but at the same time he maintained some of this features by saying that by being a monad like a person he is a person the personality is recognized, but at the same time he transcends all other monads he is supernatural and super rational a central concept Leibniz philosophy. So, it is an attempt to reconcile a priorism of rationalism and empiricism which already the great empiricist tradition was already there by the time of Leibniz and attempt to reconcile rationalism which empiricism is continued by Immanuel Kant later we see that and one important feature which we have seen is that Leibniz in all his philosophy in all his career was preoccupied with this concept this idea of harmony and monads that are windowless and God who regulate them represent a harmonious picture and here is something which Russell would say about some problems with monodology if the monads never interact how does anyone of them know that there are any others because he rejects interactionism what seems like mirroring the universe may be merely a dream Leibniz has a certain some of that all the monads have similar dreams at the same time that pre-established harmony this of course is fantastic Russell says and would never have seemed credible but for the previous history of Cartesianism and Russell makes another comeback when he concludes his discussion on Leibniz philosophy says never thus Leibniz remains a great man and his greatness is more apparent now than it was at any earlier time apart from his eminence as a mathematician and as the inventor of the infinitesimal calculus he was a pioneer in mathematical logic of which he perceived the importance when no one else did so and his philosophical hypothesis though fantastic are very clear and capable of precise expression Russell had reasons to admire Leibniz because Russell was also a mathematician and a logician and later when he Russell even wrote a book on Leibniz and when he developed his mathematical logic he acknowledges the influence of Leibniz but for our purpose Leibniz is definitely one of the most important thinkers though as Russell himself as a once observed though he was a great thinker though he was not a great human being as Spinoza was thank you.