Contingency in Leibniz's Philosophical Theology
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4765856 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Dylan Flint (The Ohio State University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 20 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Publication date | 2025-06-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy Compass (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1747-9991 • E-ISSN: 1747-9991 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/phc3.70041 |
| OpenAlex | W4410916458 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 12 |
Trying to secure a source of contingency in Leibniz's philosophical theology has been a central concern for Leibniz scholars over the past century. This article examines some of the most promising strategies on offer, including the "per se" account, the "infinite analysis" account, and the "moral necessity" account. I suggest that a helpful distinction can be made between strategies which try to locate a source of contingency in the objects of God's choice and strategies which try to locate a source of contingency in God's actions. I then argue that act-based strategies fare better because object-based strategies struggle to account for a number of Leibniz's core philo-theological commitments, most notably his commitment that God is both free and praiseworthy. I then argue that the moral necessity account of the contingency of God's actions is Leibniz's most promising act-based strategy because the moral necessity account most clearly satisfies Leibniz's contingency condition on free action. I then conclude by pointing out problems that a fully satisfying moral necessity account must overcome
Contingency · Epistemology · Theology · Historical Philosophy and Science · Philosophy · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Theology and Philosophy of Evil
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |