Les multiples équivoques, qui à plusieurs égards ont caractérisé jusqu'au siècle dernier la réception des Principes de la Nature et de la Grâce et de la Monadologie de Leibniz, trouvent leur origine dans les circonstances de la genèse de leurs manuscrits: ils donnèrent lieu à une information fautive publiée en 1721 dans un compte rendu anonyme des Acta eruditorum de Leipzig. Des recherches dans les archives démontrent que l'auteur de ce compte rendu ainsi que de la traduction latine de la (...) Monadologie, parue la même année dans les Supplementa des Acta eruditorum, était Christian Wolff qui possédait une copie du manuscrit leibnizien au moins depuis 1717. Cette traduction s'inscrit dans une stratégie culturelle précise qui vise à désamorcer toute interprétation idéaliste de la pensée monadologique de Leibniz. Un élément essentiel de cette stratégie consiste à lire la théorie de l'harmonie préétablie comme une doctrine fondée sur une métaphysique strictement dualiste des substances. (shrink)

The many equivocations that, in several respects, characterised the reception of Leibniz's Principes de la Nature et de la Grâce and Monadologie, up until the last century, find their origins in the genetic circumstances of their manuscripts, which gave rise to misinformation published in an anonymous review that appeared in the Leipzig Acta eruditorum in 1721. Archival research demonstrates that the author of this review, as well as of the Latin review of the Monadologie, which appeared, the same year, in (...) the Supplementa of the Acta eruditorum, was Christian Wolff, who possessed a copy of the Leibnizian manuscrip since at least 1717. This translation figured as a precise cultural strategy that aimed to defuse any idealist interpretation of Leibniz’s monadology. An essential part of this strategy consists in reading the theory of pre-established harmony as a doctrine founded on a strictly dualistic substance metaphysics. (shrink)

Text of 1735 and 1936 eds. of the Meditationes, with concordances, reproducedon 3 microfiches (11 x 15 cm.) in pocket.

Recent works on Leibniz include: E. Pasini, Il reale e l’immaginàrio, Torino: Sonda, 1993. Translations or editions of Leibniz’s works: G.W. Leibniz, Scritti di Lògica, edited by F. Barone, Bari: Laterza, 1992; G.W. Leibniz, L’armonìa delle lingue, ed. by S. Gensini, Bari: Laterza, 1995.

Recent works on Leibniz include: E. Pasini, Il reale e l’immaginàrio, Torino: Sonda, 1993. Translations or editions of Leibniz’s works: G.W. Leibniz, Scritti di Lògica, edited by F. Barone, Bari: Laterza, 1992; G.W. Leibniz, L’armonìa delle lingue, ed. by S. Gensini, Bari: Laterza, 1995.

Recent works on Leibniz include: E. Pasini, Il reale e l’immaginàrio, Torino: Sonda, 1993. Translations or editions of Leibniz’s works: G.W. Leibniz, Scritti di Lògica, edited by F. Barone, Bari: Laterza, 1992; G.W. Leibniz, L’armonìa delle lingue, ed. by S. Gensini, Bari: Laterza, 1995.

In August 1712 A. L. Königsmann sent to Leibniz a copy of his dissertation De rationali metaphysices cultu together with a letter. In his answer to Königsmann Leibniz underlines, firstly, his rationalistic opinion on the relationship between natural and revealed theology and, in second place, his moderate position regarding the anti-Scholastic polemics. Leibniz's letter, till now unpublished, has been edited and annexed at the bottom of the article.

1. De mundi sensibilis atque intelligibilis forma et principiis -- 2. De igne, Nova dilucidatio, Monadologia physica.

This paper presents a transcription of a handwritten Latin text, along with its translation into English, that was identified only very recently in the Kongelige Bibliothek in Copenhagen while preparing the new critical edition of Kant’s Nova dilucidatio (PND). The text consists of remarks by Johann Reinhold Grube, composed in his role as opponent at Kant’s disputation for the venia legendi on 27 September 1755. Grube’s interleaved opposing remarks on Kant’s dissertatio metaphysica pro receptione contain precious starting points for new (...) lines of research, since they vividly exemplify the point of view of one of the participants in the debate, a perspective that is rarely documented. In addition to informing us about how the disputation itself was carried out and which traditional rhetorical techniques were used, these remarks offer a compelling glimpse into the immediate reception of Kant’s first thoughts on logic and metaphysics, giving scholars access to an ingenious reaction to Kant’s stance on the theory of judgment. (shrink)