Newton vs. Leibniz: Intransparency vs. Inconsistency

TL;DR

This paper compares Newton's and Leibniz's mechanical theories, analyzing how their differing approaches to causality and identity influence the structure and transparency of their theories.

Contribution

It provides a detailed analysis of the causal structures in Newton's and Leibniz's theories, revealing surprising differences in their treatment of intransparency and inconsistency.

Findings

Newton's theory exhibits intransparency due to causal complexity.

Leibniz's theory shows inconsistencies related to identity preservation.

The analysis highlights the role of metalevel concepts in causal theories.

Abstract

We investigate the structure common to causal theories that attempt to explain a (part of) the world. Causality implies conservation of identity, itself a far from simple notion. It imposes strong demands on the universalizing power of the theories concerned. These demands are often met by the introduction of a metalevel which encompasses the notions of 'system' and 'lawful behaviour'. In classical mechanics, the division between universal and particular leaves its traces in the separate treatment of cinematics and dynamics. This analysis is applied to the mechanical theories of Newton and Leibniz, with some surprising results.