[Inquiry] Re: Doctrine Of Individuals -- Commentary

[Jon Awbrey]

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

DOI.  Commentary Note 2

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o

Let me highlight the following statement from Leibniz:

| From this it is evident that what is to be called heterogeneous or not is
| a relative matter.  However, in our calculus it is enough for two things
| to have no concepts in common out of certain fixed concepts which are
| designated by us, even though they may have others in common.
|
| Leibniz, "Elements of a Calculus", April 1679.
| http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/2003-April/000420.html

So, if Leibniz, from the very outset, did not intend his coincidence metric,
his measure of conceptual remove, to be taken in the absolute way that some
seem to think he meant it, what then?  Have those who take it that way once
again mistaken an interpretive heuristic regulation for an ontological law?

I tend to think so.

Jon Awbrey

o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o
inquiry e-lab: http://stderr.org/pipermail/inquiry/
o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o~~~~~~~~~o