The Theory of Monads

1) Theory of Monads:

The term “monad” refers to something that is singular, without division, and indivisible. According to Leibniz, these are the essential things that exist. His monad theory is intended to be a better alternative to the then-emerging theory of atoms in natural philosophy.

Leibniz proposes a theory of pre-established harmony (also known as the hypothesis of concomitance) to explain the behaviour of objects that appear to be tied to one another rather than the idea that cause and effect is the fundamental agent of change. Think about the wellused example of two clocks. The two accurate clocks are located on opposite sides of a room (that is, they tell the same time). Now, if one didn’t understand how clocks functioned, one might assume that the other clock always followed the master clock.

Without any concrete evidence, it is frequently assumed that there is causality when two entities behave in a similar manner. However, a different person who was knowledgeable about clocks would clarify that the two clocks are not related and instead have a common cause (for example, in the last person to set and wind them). Since then, they have each been operating independently and in sync with one another without interfering with one another. Every monad, according to Leibniz, operates independently of the other monads, much like a clock.

Nevertheless, in God’s broad vision of the ideal universe, every monad is synced with one another. But we must be careful not to read too much into this mechanical image of a clock. Not all monads can be explained in terms of effective, physical causes.

Leibniz contends that monads are unaffected by one another and that each monad expresses the entirety of the universe in accordance with his theory of pre-established harmony. Leibniz describes how every monad embodies every other monad and therefore mirrors the entirety of the universe, but that no monad has a window through which it might truly receive or provide causal influences.

Furthermore, a monad cannot be created or destroyed because it cannot be altered (except by God through a miracle–defined as something outside the natural course of events). Thus, all monads are everlasting. (It is fair to say that Leibniz’s attempt to explain what happens to “souls” prior to the birth of a body and following its death led him to some colourful but somewhat strained theories.)

2) Monad:

Monad, (from Greek monas “unit”), an elementary individual substance that reflects the order of the world and from which material properties are derived. The term was first used by the Pythagoreans as the name of the beginning number of a series, from which all following numbers derived. Giordano Bruno in De monade, numero et figura liber (1591; “On the Monad, Number, and Figure”) described three fundamental types: God, souls, and atoms. The idea of monads was popularized by Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz in Monadologia (1714).

In Leibniz’s system of metaphysics, monads are basic substances that make up the universe but lack spatial extension and hence are immaterial. Each monad is a unique, indestructible, dynamic, soullike entity whose properties are a function of its perceptions and appetites.

Monads have no true causal relation with other monads, but all are perfectly synchronized with each other by God in a preestablished harmony. The objects of the material world are simply appearances of collections of monads. Monads are not truly causally related to one another, yet God has perfectly timed them all to be in harmony with one another. The things in the physical world are just collections of monads in various states of appearance.

3) Leibniz and Rationalism:

Leibniz’s philosophical framework reveals a general commitment to the notion that the universe has a logical order that can be understood by human minds. This dedication is evident in both the philosophical theology found in the Theodicy as well as in his more general epistemological and metaphysical beliefs on exhibit in works like the Monadology.

Monads, which Leibniz thinks to be the only true substances in the universe, are the basic building blocks of his philosophy. His reasoning is based on the premise that real substances must be straightforward, which, in his view, is immediately obvious to the human intellect.

Only minds are indivisible, making them the only objects that qualify as substances. All other things, including bodies, people, and animals, can be divided into their component pieces. Following are significant metaphysical conclusions. According to Leibniz, there may not be a true causal contact between substances since a true causal connection would necessitate that the substances be capable of being modified from without, which would go against their inherent simplicity. Actual substantive inside alterations are hidden by apparent changes.

This “pre-established harmony” guarantees that apparent causal connections will be anchored in real changes in monads since all changes are associated with the states of all other monads. The metaphysics of Leibniz is centered on the concept of harmony. It is guaranteed that the moral order will be realized since there is a predetermined harmony between the changes of substances and a harmony between the order of nature and the order of grace. Leibniz’s assertion that this is the best of all possible universes makes this argument very evident. In this passage, Leibniz tries to defend God’s kindness against what seems to be physical proof of all the evil in the universe. Leibniz asserts that this evil just seems to bear witness against God’s kindness. We are aware of God’s perfection and the fact that a perfect creature can only act in the finest manner. Therefore, the fact that God created this world shows that it is possibly the best. We can have faith in this world’s goodness and intelligence since the appearances that seem to testify against it are just that—appearances.

4) Its importance in Philosophy:

The pre-established harmony theory put forth by Leibniz is another significant development in the development of the philosophy of mind. Leibniz, like occasionalists, rejects any actual communication between the body and the spirit. He concurs with them that there is no real causal relationship between his soul and his body, or between his body and his soul, to account for the fact that his foot moves when he choses to move it and that he experiences pain when his body is hurt.

Leibniz opposes the notion that God always intervenes to produce the connection between a soul and a body, in contrast to occasionalists. Leibniz believes that would be unworthy of God. Instead, without any contact or guidance from God, his spirit and his body were made in a way that they naturally correlate to one another. His foot only moves when he tells it to, since this motion was built into it from the start. Similar to how he experiences anguish when his body is hurt, this pain is ingrained in his soul. Therefore, the harmony or correlation between mental and physical states is already known.

5) Criticism of the Theory:

Russell provided a thorough critique of the conventional idea of substance in his book on Leibniz. Russell eventually came to the conclusion that the conventional understanding of substance was empirically deficient and based on a flawed logical theory. Russell’s argument ultimately leads to the conclusion that some key concepts traditionally linked to the metaphysics of substance are useless in metaphysics and must be dropped. This explains why Whitehead will try to develop a system of revisionary metaphysics where the notion of substance as the underlying holder of properties is replaced by the notion of the actual entity as an occasion of experience that is organically related to all other occasions. Whitehead appears to have been persuaded by Russell’s arguments.