Leibniz on Monads

[@louisparry-mills9132]

your monad is among my favourite pedagogical monads, mr Gijsbers

[@louisparry-mills9132]

though the innate qualities a monad has to make it pedagogical is not possible to scrutinise unfortunately.

[@logos3514]

A very clear explanation of !Leibniz’s philosophy in a way that anyone can understand. Thank You!

[@glycolictonic]

Thank you, that was an exceptionally clear overview, excellent stuff! Certainly will have to read the Monadology again when time allows.

[@piodiaz489]

Nice one. Thanks!

[@postyoda1623]

Ooh, I found a gem; youtube algo working for good for once. Very clear, very concise without being imprecise. Amazing presentation of a fascinating subject.; now off we go to the Wittgenstein and Anscombe playlists. I'm very happy to have found your channel, sir-as a major in philosophy of science who hasn't lost his love for all that is the world of mental manipulation!!!

[@VictorGijsbers]

@@postyoda1623 Thanks for the kind words! I hope you enjoy the other videos as well. (As for the KZbin algorithm... let's just say that I still have not recovered from the time it told me that since I was interested in philosophy, I would probably like a video in which Tucker Carlson explains Aleksandr Dugin's views on transgenders.)

[@postyoda1623]

@@VictorGijsbers haha, I've cleansed that stuff from my timeline pretty successfully, but they do push it aggressively; I sometimes think it's maybe manual, it's so aggressive. But it has got to do more with being terminally online selecting for non-random demos probably.

[@NadimHamzaoui-s1y]

The clearest explanation of Leibniz on the net..! It would be great if you could someday compare and contrast Leibniz concept of the monad with Whitehead's monad.

[@VictorGijsbers]

@@NadimHamzaoui-s1y Thanks! I have not read a word of Whitehead in my life (I think? Perhaps I have read some passages of Principia), so this is certainly a project for the far and uncertain future.

[@dennisdeslager3382]

Love the Escher shirt as well ;)

[@VictorGijsbers]

I think it's not really Escher, but strongly Escher inspired. :D

[@ashkondastmalchi3510]

this is great thank you

[@WmABeetstra]

I am glad that my perception of Leibniz allows me to deny interaction with Leibniz. My activity allows me to note my monadic status as God. Or did I get that entirely wrong on account of my confused perception?

[@andreasplosky8516]

Why MUST there be things without parts? I am not convinced.

[@VictorGijsbers]

This is a topic of contention in contemporary metaphysics. There are certainly a lot of philosophers who agree with you and not with Leibniz; that is, they believe in the possibility of 'gunk': en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunk_(mereology)