Switch to: References

Citations of:

Leibniz and the vis viva controversy

In Marcelo Dascal (ed.), The Practice of Reason: Leibniz and His Controversies. Philadelphia / Amsterdam: John Benjamins. pp. 51-73 (2010)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Is prime matter energy?David S. Oderberg - 2023 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 101 (3):534-550.
    This paper tests the following hypothesis: that the prime matter of classical Aristotelian-Scholastic metaphysics is numerically identical to energy. Is P=E? After outlining the classical Aristotelian concept of prime matter, I provide the master argument for it based on the phenomenon of substantial change. I then outline what we know about energy as a scientific concept, including its role and application in some key fields. Next, I consider the arguments in favour of prime matter being identical to energy, followed by (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Leibniz y el método de la metafísica: El debate con de volder acerca de la definición de sustancia.Rodolfo E. Fazio - 2016 - Dissertatio 43 (S3):298-329.
    En nuestro trabajo estudiamos el debate entre Leibniz y De Volder acerca de la naturaleza de la sustancia. En particular, argumentamos que a pesar de no encontrarse en la correspondencia un argumento a priori a favor de la definición de sustancia como fuerza primitiva activa, Leibniz presenta una justificación de la misma en otros términos. En primer lugar, analizamos la prueba a priori a favor de las fuerzas vivas y criticamos su validez para la metafísica. En segundo lugar, examinamos la (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Cause and Effect in Leibniz’s Brevis demonstratio.Laurynas Adomaitis - 2019 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 9 (1):120-134.
    Leibniz’s argument against Descartes’s conservation principle in the Brevis demonstratio (1686) has traditionally been read as passing from the premise that motive force must be conserved to the conclusion that motive force is not identical to quantity of motion and, finally, that quantity of motion is not conserved. In a lesser-known draft of the same year, Christiaan Huygens claimed that Descartes had in fact never held the view that Leibniz was attacking. Huygens is right as far as the traditional reading (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
    		•
  • Thinking Nature, "Pierre Maupertuis and the Charge of Error Against Fermat and Leibniz".Richard Samuel Lamborn - unknown
    The purpose of this dissertation is to defend Pierre Fermat and Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz against the charge of error made against them by Pierre Maupertuis that they errantly applied final causes to physics. This charge came in Maupertuis’ 1744 speech to the Paris Academy of Sciences, later published in different versions, entitled Accord Between Different Laws Which at First Seemed Incompatible. It is in this speech that Maupertuis lays claim to one of the most important discoveries in the history of (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation