Osman Gazi Birgül

99116

Olası Dünyalar Diskurunun Ontolojik Kökenleri Üzerine: Leibniz ve Spinoza Karşılaştırması

Bu makalenin iki temel amacı bulunmaktadır. İlki, modern ontolojideki olası dünya diskurunun ontolojik kökenlerini özellikle Leibniz ve Spinoza’nın metafizik görüşleri bağlamında araştırmaktır. İkinci amaç, Leibniz ve Spinoza’nın birbirinden farklı metafizik çerçeveleri olmasına rağmen, Tanrı’nın antropomorfik tasviri gibi belirli teolojik konularda keskin bir şekilde zıt görüşlere sahip olsalar bile, her ikisinin de olası dünyalar diskurunu sistemlerinde modal mantık çerçevesinde barındırdığını göstermektir. Bu amaçlar doğrultusunda makale iki bölüme ayrılmıştır. İlk bölüm, Leibniz’in olası dünyalar diskurunu kullanarak klasik felsefi sorunlara, örneğin kötülük problemi, problemin Thrasymachus versiyonu, Euthyphro ikilemi ve günah problemi gibi sorunlara sunduğu çözümleri açıklamaktadır. İkinci bölüm, Spinoza’nın metafizik çerçevesini ve Tanrı’nın antropomorfik betimlemesine karşı savlarını ışığında, özgürlük, zorunluluk, mükemmellik, gerçeklik, Natura Naturata ve Natura Naturans gibi kavramların etkileşimini incelemektedir. Araştırmanın sonucu, olası dünyalar diskurunun kökenlerinin temel olarak modal mantık alanında bulunduğudur. Modal mantığın mevcut olduğu bir metafizik çerçevede olası dünyalar diskuru da doğal olarak mevcuttur. Çalışma, Leibniz ve Spinoza’nın metafizik çerçevelerini karşılaştırarak bu iddiayı desteklemekte ve buna göre her ikisi de olası dünyalar diskuruna ontolojilerinde farklı şekillerde de olsa yer vermektedir. Özünde, bu çalışma, olası dünyalar diskurunun metafizik temellerini incelerken, farklı felsefi çerçeveler arasında modal mantık zemininde ortaklık bulunduğunu göstererek bilimsel yazına katkıda bulunmaktadır.
Anahtar Kelimeler:

Leibniz, Spinoza, Mümkün Dünya Tartışması, Modalite, Modern Metafizik

On the Ontological Roots of the Possible Worlds Discourse: Leibniz vs Spinoza

This paper pursues two primary objectives. Firstly, it delves into the origins of the discourse on possible worlds within modern ontology, focusing particularly on the metaphysical perspectives of Leibniz and Spinoza. Secondly, it endeavors to illustrate that despite their divergent metaphysical frameworks, which are diametrically opposed on certain theological issues such as the anthropomorphic conception of God, both Leibniz and Spinoza accommodate the discourse on possible worlds through modal logic. To achieve these aims, the article is divided into two sections. The first section elucidates Leibniz’s utilization of the discourse on possible worlds to proffer resolutions to classical philosophical quandaries, including the problem of evil, the Thrasymachus version thereof, the Euthyphro dilemma, and the problem of sin. The second section scrutinizes Spinoza’s metaphysical framework and, in light of his rebuttals against the anthropomorphic portrayal of God, examines the interplay among concepts such as freedom, necessity, perfection, reality, Natura Naturata, and Natura Naturans. The culmination of this investigation leads to the conclusion that the discourse on possible worlds fundamentally resides within the domain of modal logic. Wherever modal logic finds its application within a given metaphysical framework, the discourse on possible worlds naturally follows suit. The study substantiates this assertion through the contrasting metaphysical paradigms of Leibniz and Spinoza, both of which validate the legitimacy of the discourse on possible worlds. In essence, this study contributes to the scholarly discourse by offering a nuanced examination of the metaphysical underpinnings of the discourse on possible worlds, demonstrating its inherent compatibility with modal logic across divergent philosophical frameworks.
Keywords:

Leibniz, Spinoza, Possible Worlds Discourse, Modality, Modern Metaphysics,

PDF

___

Adams, Robert Merrihew; Finite and Infinite Goods: A Framework for Ethics, New York: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Bender, Sebastian; “On Worlds, Laws and Tiles: Leibniz and the Problem of Compossibility”, Leibniz on Compossibility and Possible Worlds, eds. Georg Brown and Yual Chiek, Switzerland: Springer, 2016.
Bender, Sebastian; “‘Si Omnia Possibilia Existerent...’ Why Leibniz Denies That All Possibles Can Exist.” History of Philosophy Quarterly 33, no. 3 (2016): 215–36.
Brown, Gregory; “Compossibility, Harmony, and Perfection in Leibniz.” The Philosophical Review 96, no. 2 (1987): 173–203.
Clayton, Philip; Adventures in the Spirit: God, World, Divine Action, ed. by Zachary Simpson, Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2008.
Curley, Edwin; Behind the Geometrical Method: A Reading of Spinoza’s Ethics, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988.
Della Rocca, Michael; Representation and the Mind-Body Problem in Spinoza, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996.
Gueroult, Martial; Spinoza I: Dieu (Ethique I), Paris: Aubier-Montaigne, 1968.
Jones, James W.; Terror and Transformation: The Ambiguity of Religion in Psychoanalytic Perspective, London: Routledge, 2002.
Kant, Immanuel; Critique of Pure Reason, trans. & ed. by Paul Guyer and Allen W. Wood), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “1. That a Most Perfect Being Exists”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 167-168.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “Demonstration of the Existence of God”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, p. 73.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “First Truths”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 267-272.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “II. Corollaries for Disputation”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 74-76.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “On Freedom”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, (ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker), Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht: 1989, pp. 263-267.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “On the Ethics of Benedict De Spinoza”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 196-207.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “Reflections on the Common Concept of Justice”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 561-574.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “Supplement: Notes on the Eucharist”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 118-119.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “The Confession of Nature against Atheists”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 109-113.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “The Monadology”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 643-654.
Leibniz, Gottfried W.; “Two Notations for Discussion with Spinoza”, Philosophical Papers and Letters, ed. & trans. by Leroy E. Loemker, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1989, pp. 167-169.
Mason, Richard; “Spinoza on Modality.” The Philosophical Quarterly (1950-) 36, no. 144 (1986): 313–42.
McCord Adams, Marilyn; Horrendous Evils and the Goodness of God, London: Cornell University Press, 1999.
Miller, Jon A.; “Spinoza’s Possibilities.” The Review of Metaphysics 54, no. 4 (2001): 779–814.
Moreau, Pierre-François; Spinoza: L’Expérience et l’Éternité, Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1994.
Newlands, Samuel; “The Harmony of Spinoza and Leibniz.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81, no. 1 (2010): 64–104.
Ottaviani, Osvaldo; “Divine Wisdom and Possible Worlds. Leibniz’s Notes to the Spinoza-Oldenburg Correspondence and the Development of His Metaphysics.” Studia Leibnitiana 48, no. 1 (2016): 15–41.
Pereboom, Derk; Living Without Free Will, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.
Rescher, Nicholas; “Leibniz as a Critic of Spinoza.” Studia Leibnitiana 47, no. 2 (2015): 186–204.
Sinnott-Armstrong, Walter; Moral Scepticisms, New York: Oxford University Press, 2006.
Spinoza, Benedictus De; “Ethics”, A Spinoza Reader, ed. and trans. by Edwin Curley, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994, pp. 85-266.
Spinoza, Benedictus De; “Ethics”, Spinoza Complete Works, ed. Michael L. Morgan, trans. Samuel Shirley, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2002, pp. 213-283.
Spinoza, Benedictus De; “The Letters”, Spinoza Complete Works, ed. Michael L. Morgan, trans. Samuel Shirley, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2002, pp. 755-961.
Spinoza, Benedictus De; “Short Treatise on God, Man and His Well-Being”, Spinoza Complete Works, ed. Michael L. Morgan, trans. by Samuel Shirley, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company, 2002, pp. 31-108.
Wolterstorff, Nicholas; Justice: Rights and Wrongs, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2008.

Kutadgubilig: Felsefe Bilim Araştırmaları-Cover
  • ISSN: 1303-3387
  • Yayın Aralığı: 2
  • Başlangıç: 2002
  • Yayıncı: Dergah Yayınları A.Ş.
Arşiv
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Batı Siyasi Düşünceler Tarihinde Geleneksel Monarşi ve Adalet Düşüncelerinin Doğuşu: Homeros’tan Hesiodos’a

Fırat Mollaer

Heidegger ve Merleau-Ponty’de Mekan

Hacer Meryem Kor

Olası Dünyalar Diskurunun Ontolojik Kökenleri Üzerine: Leibniz ve Spinoza Karşılaştırması

Osman Gazi Birgül

Geç Dönem Osmanlı Ahlâk Düşüncesinde Yeni Telif Arayışları

Yusuf İzzettin Aktaş