# Leibniz Legible — https://leibnizlegible.com
# Page: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/778263916:0396
# Permalink to this reading: https://leibnizlegible.com/page/778263916:0396?run=74
# Title: An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding (shelfmarks Leibn. Marg. 38; ZEN Leibn. Marg. 38)
# Folio - , page id 778263916:0396
# Original at the GWLB: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/resolve?id=778263916&page=396
# Source image: https://digitale-sammlungen.gwlb.de/content/778263916/jpgs/default/00000396.jpg
# Model: FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74, 2026-09-06T16:05:13Z — 100 lines, status machine
# Lines: 100 recognised, mean confidence 0.88
# Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German.
# Licence: CC BY 4.0, Leibniz Legible. Machine output: do not ingest it as verified text; keep this provenance with the text.
# Wording rule: say "the machine reads it as …", never "Leibniz wrote".
# After the first blank line: the recognised lines in reading order, one per line.

NIbbeIt.
CII A P. V
Of Universal Proposicions, their Truth
dLla 2.
and (ertaint v.
T. Freatinq of Words necessary t0
Knooledee.
2. Generat Truths haraiy +0 be un-
derstood, hut in verbat Proposi
tions.
3. Cerrainty evo. fold, of Truth and
of Rnouledee.
4. No Proposition can be knoon tobe
true, uhere the Pssence of each
Species mentioned is not knoon.
5. This more particularly concerns
Substances.
6. The Fruth of feru universat Pro.
positions concernine Substances, is
+o be knoon.
7. Because C0. existence of Ideas in
feu Cases to be tenoon.
8, 9. Instance in Cold.
2O. AS far a5 any such Co- existence
can be tnoun, se far universal
Propositions may be certain.
But this will 80 but a litile vay,
because,
TF, T2. The Oualities whichmake our com-
plex Ideas of Substances, depend
mostlron external, remote, and un-
percerved Causes.
23. Fudrment may reach farther, but
that is not Rnovledee.
T4. WVhat is requisite for our Rnou
ledee of Substances.
25. Whilst our Ideas of Substances
contain not their real Constitu-
tions, ve can make but feu gene-
ral certain Propositions concernine
ihem.
26. Wberein lies the ceneral Certain-
ty of Propositions.
CII A P. VI
Of Maxim
BECL
eo LC) ae sebsadcen.
3. Selfevidence not peculiar +0 re-
cerved axioms
First, 45t0 Lachl) and Diver–
sity, au Proposirions are equally
Sebf.evident.
3. Secondly. In Cocasn ut sade
feu selfevident Propositions.
6. Thiralr. In other Relations we
F2. Maxims, if care be not taten in
the use of nords, may prove con-
Proofsuhere We have clear and di-
may have.
7. Fourchly, Concernine real Exi
StenCC WWe BaVC HOnE.
8. These Axioms ao not much inftu–
ence our oiset anouledée.
9, 20. Because therare notthe Truths the
first enoion.
have.
TF. What use Ed generat Maxims
FraatCcrous.
13. Instance In Vacuum.
T4. They prove not the Existence of
Thines Without us.
X5. Their Application danserous about
complex Ideas.
16- -- 16. Intanco n Man.
29. Fitile use of these Maxims in
stinet Ldeas.
20. Their use dangerons where our
Ldeasarc confused.
CH XL. VIII
4. Secondly, When a part of any com
plex Idea  predicated of the
OF Tristing Proposicions.
SFC
I. Some Proposions brins noincrease
2.HBerem Ebat Self- C22dene C9
35.
toour lnouledee.
233. As First, Identicat Propositions.
Whote.
5. A5 part of the definition of the
denea.
6. Instance Man and Patfry-
7. For this teaches but the sienisica
Tion of Woras.
8. But no reat Rhourcas.
9. cenerat Propostious conbetatue
Substances are often, tristine.
2O. And Wtiy.
TT. Thirdly, Ohne Woras variousti, is
stine Weth TBEM.