The rest of Baumgarten's ontology is perhaps not as original as the earlier sections, but it
is at least interesting, because Baumgarten rearranges topics and
includes in general relational predicates some issues that Wolff did
not consider under relations. The first of these topics is identity
and the related notions of diversity and similarity. Here we find
Baumgarten, for instance, endorsing the Leibnizian principle of the
identity of indiscirnibles: two different things cannot be completely
similar.
Space and time or
simultaneity and succession are also dealt by Baumgarten in the
chapter on relations. Although Wolff had also endorsed the idea that
space and time are nothing but relations, Baumgarten is making this
notion even more explicit by this simple choice of how to present the
topic.
Just like with
Wolff, the central relational notion in Baumgarten's ontology is
obviously causality. Cause is for Baumgarten, just like it was for
Wolff, a more special modification of ground or reason. For
Baumgarten, cause is specifically a ground for the existence of
something. Just like Wolff before him, Baumgarten defines several
notions important to causal considerations – some causes might
coordinate with other causes in producing some effect, while others
may be called more proximate, when compared with more immediate
causes of something.
The most important
type of cause for Baumgarten is probably the efficient cause, which
has actively produced some reality or positive characteristics in
something else (Baumgarten also invents the notion of deficient cause
for those actions, which produce some negative characteristics). A
number of other causal notions can then be defined in terms of
whether they help an efficient cause to do something or whether they
hinder it.
In addition to
efficient cause, Baumgarten does also, just like Wolff before him,
consider the other three Aristotelian causes: form, matter and final
cause. This part of Baumgarten's ontology seems rather quaint, like a
remnant of a past long gone.
The final relation
Baumgarten considers is that between signs and what the signs express. Although
Wolff did briefly consider this topic, Baumgarten somewhat expands
Wolff's writing. For instance, he considers several sciences, in
which one should either make up more signs (heuristics) or help us
recognise past signs (mnemonics), and also tries to explain the
genesis of human language.
So much for
Baumgarten's ontology. Next time I'll look at his cosmology
Ei kommentteja:
Lähetä kommentti