Leibniz Legible

Machine transcription of the Leibniz Nachlass

Search the Nachlass

An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, fol. 247

Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German. Mean line confidence on this page: 0.91.

Original at the GWLB · Page image · Annotations (IIIF) · Download text

The machine reads it as

  1. a more or lesS pertect Collectiori oF simple Ldeas, serres to design that
  2. sore of Body rell enoustr in ciril Discourse) comes to have no Significa
  3. tion at all, beins put for lomerhat wtrereor re have no Ldea at all; and
  4. (0 can lienitie nothins at all, orhien the Body it selE is araz. Por how-
  5. ever it mas De thought all one; Tet, it tvell considered, it will be Pound
  6. a quite difterent thing, to argue about Giold in name, and about a parcet
  7. olthe Body it Selt, v. 8. 2 Diece oF LeaF Cold laid before us; thouetr in
  8. Discourse, ire are fain to substiture the name For the thing.
  9. 5. 29. That Which, Pchink, very much disposes Men ro substiturocheir
  10. names For the real FSences oF Species, is the supposition belore mentioned,
  11. that Nature wortes regularls in the Production of Things, and sets che
  12. Boundaries to cach ot those Species, by giving exactls the lame real in-
  13. ternal Constitution to cach intividual, wrhich e ranke under one general
  14. name. Wrhereas ans one who obserres their ditterent ualities, can hard-
  15. Iy doube that mans ofthe Indiriduals, called by the lame name, are in
  16. their internal Consticution, as difterent one trom another, as several of
  17. ehose wrhich are ranted under different speciticke Names. This supposition
  18. hoirerer rhat the same precise internal constitution soes alvars vith the
  19. same specisicte name, makees Men forvard to take thole names for the Repre-
  20. seniatives or thole real Fssences, though indeed ther signitie nothino buE
  21. the complex deas ther have in their Minds, When they use them. So
  22. that, il Lmay (0 laz, Eisnilz ins one chins, and beins supposed fOr, or
  23. put in the place of arocher, ther cannot bur, in such a tind ot ulc, cause
  24. a great deal os Incertaintr in MenS Discourses; especiallr in thole who
  25. havethrouslils imbibed the Doctrine ot substantial Forms, Wherebr they
  26. frmly imasine the several Species oF Thiries ro be determined and distin-
  27. Guithed.
  28. S. 2F. But horever preposterous and absurd it be, to makce our natmes
  29. Stand For Ideas ire have not, or (rhich is all One) Fsences thatwe lnoir
  30. nOt, it being in effect, to make our Nords tho SignS OF nothins; vet
  31. eis cvident to anz one, erhoerer so litele reflects on the ule Nen makce ot
  32. their Words, that there is nothins more samiliar. When a Man astS
  33. Whecher this or thatthines he secs, let it be a Drill, or a monstrous l’aetus, be
  34. a Man Or no; tis evident, the Ouestion is not, WVhecher that particular
  35. thino aorecto his complex idea expresled by the name Man: Buc Wvhe
  36. ther it has in it the real Fssence oF a Species ot Thinos, Wtich he supposes
  37. hisname Man to Cand FOr. In Which vay of usine the names of Substances,
  38. there are these false suypositions contained.
  39. First, That there are certain precise Fsences, accordino to irhieh Na-
  40. ture malies all particular Things, and by wrhich ther are distinouisted
  41. into Species. Thac every thine has a real Constitution, Whereby it is
  42. wrtrat it is, and on hich its sensible Oualities depend, is past doube: But
  43. Ithinke it has been proved, thac this makces not the distinction os Species,
  44. as Wre rants them; nor the Boundaries oF cheirnames.
  45. Seconaly ThistacitY also insinuares, 25 it wehad Ideas oFthese propo-
  46. sed Fstences. For to what purpose else is ic, to enguire wrhether chis or
  47. that thing hare the real FiPenee oF che Species Ntan, it we did nor suppose
  48. thar there ere tuch a specitick Fssence knomn. Which yet is utterly falle:
  49. And theretore such Application of names, as rould makce them stand for
  50. Ideas ae hare nOE, must necds cause oreat dilorder in Discourles and Rea-
  51. soninss abour them, and be a Gredt inconrenience in our Communication
  52. Dy WorctS.
  53. 2.2

Cite

An Essay Concerning Humane Understanding, fol. 247. Machine transcription, not an edition: Leibniz Legible (model FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74). https://leibnizlegible.com/page/778263916:0263?run=74