Talk:Best of all possible worlds

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Socrates This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Philosophy, which collaborates on articles related to philosophy. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
??? This article has not yet received an importance rating on the importance scale.
 WikiProject Religion This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Wikipedia's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.
Start This article has been rated as start on the Project's quality scale.
(If you rated the article please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)

I've moved this (slightly tidied) comment here:

"Bertrand Russell, in his History of Western Philosophy suggested (based on Leibniz's private papers) that Leibniz was not himself satisfied with the argument, but published it to keep favour with his sponsors."

Russell's view of Leibniz (that he had two philosophies, one esoteric for himself and other philosophers, one exoteric for his patrons, etc.) has long been out of fashion. Most commentators now hold (so far as I'm aware) that Leibniz was committed to this view while realising that there were problems with it that needed attention. Indeed, the maerial on Leibniz is among the more misleading in what is a a rather misleading (but dangerously readable and attractively written) book. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:25, 31 July 2005 (UTC)