Leibniz, orthodox or heterodox?

[TheAsh1646]

I wanted to post this discussion because I’m curious if anyone sees Leibniz as theologically unorthodox? I hope this doesn’t sound to pushy or puffed up, but I do not want to hear people’s personal opinion if they have not read Leibniz, I would like to see direct references from his writings, because through my reading, he seems orthodox. And I would even consider him a philosophical Puritan.

 

[C. M. Sheffield]

Please add a signature to your account.

Signature Requirements

 

[TheAsh1646]

Done! Sorry about that!

 

[RamistThomist]

As far as I can tell, he considered himself orthodox Lutheran. I don't agree with his principle of sufficient reason, but I don't think it is heretical.

 

[RamistThomist]

In terms of mathematics and pure intellect, Leibniz was easily the most important man of the age (sorry Newton).

 

[Logan]

In terms of mathematics and pure intellect, Leibniz was easily the most important man of the age (sorry Newton).

I don't know about "easily". The calculus was only one part of Newton's contribution. His contributions in the laws of thermodynamics, optics, and motion were also huge. I agree that Newton wasn't a giant philosophically.

 

[RamistThomist]

I don't know about "easily". The calculus was only one part of Newton's contribution. His contributions in the laws of thermodynamics, optics, and motion were also huge. I agree that Newton wasn't a giant philosophically.

Fair enough. I'll give Newton credit on calculus and Leibniz credit on the notation.

 

[No Other Name]

Fair enough. I'll give Newton credit on calculus and Leibniz credit on the notation.

d/dx >> f'(x)

 

[Logan]

d/dx >> f'(x)

But that's LaGrange's notation