Pre-Leibnizian Moral Necessity

The Leibniz Review 14:1-28 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The mature Leibniz frequently uses the phrase “moral necessity” in the context of discussing free choice. In this essay I provide a seventeenth century geneology of the phrase. I show that the doctrine of moral necessity was developed by scholastic philosophers who sought to retain a robust notion of freedom while purging bruteness from their systems. Two sorts of bruteness were special targets. The first is metaphysical bruteness, according to which contingent events or states of affairs occur without a sufficient explanation. The second is semantic bruteness according to which a proposition can be true without a truth maker. Denying eithersort of bruteness was thought by some to raise problems for freedom. Defenders of moral necessity thought the notion solved these problems without having to invoke bruteness

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 97,297

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The fundamental and the brute.Ralf Bader - 2020 - Philosophical Studies 178 (4):1121-1142.
Bruteness and supervenience : mind vs. morality.Joseph Levine - 2018 - In Elly Vintiadis & Constantinos Mekios (eds.), Brute Facts. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
I. The 'bruteness' of CFs.Dean Zimmerman - 2011 - In Ken Perszyk (ed.), Molinism: The Contemporary Debate. Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press. pp. 163.
An epistemological challenge to ontological bruteness.Joshua Matthan Brown - 2021 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 91 (1):23-41.
Moral and ethical potential of decalogue.A. Moskovchuk - 1999 - Ukrainian Religious Studies 10:38-42.
Freedom of Indifference: Its Metaphysical Credentials According to Crusius.Sonja Schierbaum - 2019 - Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences:1-21.

Analytics

Added to PP
2012-03-18

Downloads
36 (#493,811)

6 months
9 (#699,366)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael Murray
Franklin and Marshall College

Citations of this work

Why Did the One Not Remain within Itself?Mark Johnston - 2019 - Oxford Studies in Philosophy of Religion 9:106-164.
Leibniz on free and responsible wrongdoing.Juan Garcia Torres - 2022 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 31 (1):23-43.
Descartes on Free Will and Moral Possibility.Brian Embry - 2016 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research:380-398.

View all 8 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references