Titlebook: Leibniz’s Metaphysics and Adoption of Substantial Forms; Between Continuity a Adrian Nita Book 2015 Springer International Publishing Switz

figure

艦旗

Daniel Garbern Austria, the regular armed forces, militia units as their reserve, and different civil first responder organizations support such missions. All of them represent important stakeholders for the restoration of public safety. Disaster relief missions need to fulfill demanding requirements and high st

Infiltrate

致敬

,The Individual in Leibniz’s Philosophy, 1663–1686,entical proposition, differentiated only by the emphasis, to be an axiom, namely, that what is not truly . being is not truly one . either.” The authors shed light on Leibniz’s changing notions of substance and being by concentrating on his changing views about unity and the individual, from his ear

pulmonary-edema

,Substance, Unity and Identity in Early Leibniz’s Work,ty. The author gives an indirect answer to the question of how to decide between these alternatives, discussing the unity and identity of substance in the frame-work of the relationship between the notions . and .. So, the major question of the paper is: what is the place of the new evaluation of su

逃避現(xiàn)實

onlooker

Essential Differences. Or, an Exercise in Symptomatic History of Philosophy,al question: “Formas substantiales quis neget, id est differentias essentiales corporum?” (“Who would ever reject substantial forms, that is to say, the essential differences of the bodies?”). The author tries to clarify this unusual locution, as the possible symptom of some more general and, perhap

個人長篇演說

,Affects and Activity in Leibniz’s ,, 1679. The memoir marks a new stage in Leibniz’s views of the mind. The motivation for this change can be found in Leibniz’s rejection of the Cartesian theory of passion and action in the 1670s. Leibniz’s early Aristotelianism and some features of Cartesianism persisted, to which Leibniz added influ

Spinal-Fusion

手銬

,Corporeal Substances as Monadic Composites in Leibniz’s Later Philosophy,defensible reading of the claim that, in his later philosophy, Leibniz characterizes entities composed of a dominating monad and a plurality of subordinate monads as “corporeal substances” (the M-Composite View). This reading has been subject to a number of criticisms by Brandon Look and Donald Ruth