Abstract
Late in his life, Wundt published a book on Leibniz, 200 years after Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz died in 1716. In this book, he states a long-lasting interest in Leibniz. He grasped the opportunity to summarize this interest as a part of the memorial in 1916. A closer reading of this book, however, is not just a celebration speech of Leibniz. It is a highly personal confession of the importance of Leibniz’s intellectual activities as a forerunner to some fundamentals for Wundt’s experimental and folk psychology. Yet, by drawing the line back to Leibniz, Wundt also indirectly sketches and includes those intermediate scholars that contributed with continuing the historical line between them. In this paper, Wundt’s reading of Leibniz is examined. One of the striking aspects of his reading is that he is not so interested in Leibniz’s philosophy, as he is of his mathematical thinking. Leibniz’s discovery of differential calculus, the aspect of dynamics in physics and his critic of the mechanistic understanding of causality are probably some of the most important changes that paved the way for modernity and the modern thinking. Wundt makes an indirect connection between those discoveries and the forthcoming psychology. However, Leibniz did not apply the term “psychology”, but Wundt did not hesitate to regard aspects of Leibniz’s authorship as contributions to psychology. The use of the term related to Leibniz is justified by the fact that the one who systematized Leibniz’s philosophy was his student Christian Wolff. This was also the same person to be the first one in the history to include and apply the term psychology as a core aspect of philosophy. The reaction Kant had on this is well known. Thus, this paper will concentrate on the link between Wundt and Leibniz to shed some light on the upcoming use of the term psychology on its way to achieve the status as an experimental science at the end of the nineteenth century.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
The source is published in DDR, which some might be suspicious to. This publication, however, is a facsimile of the original editions where even the original typing and pagination are retained.
“Das ganze Gebäude dieser mathematischen Psychologie besteht nämlich in einer Statik und Mechanik der Vorstellungen”.
References
Arendt, H. (1998). The Human Condition, Second Edition, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Aristotle. (1994). Metaphysics, Translated by W. D. Ross, Provided by The Internet Classics Archive. http://classics.mit.edu//Aristotle/metaphysics.html
Bacon, F. (1620/2000). The New Organon. In L. Jardine, M. Silverthorne (Eds.), Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press.
Baron, M.E. (1969). The Origins of the Infinitisemal Calculus, Oxford, Pergamon Press.
Brynildsen, A. (1976). Johannes Kepler. Oslo, Dreyer: Nyplatonismenstriumfogselvovervinnelse.
Copleston, F. (1962). A history of philosophy. Volume 1: Greece & Rome. Part I, Garden City NY, Image Books.
Copleston, F. (1963). A history of philosophy. Volume 4: Modern Philosophy: Descartes to Leibniz, Garden City NY, Image Books.
Descartes, R. (2015). The passions of the soul, and other late philosophical writings. Transl. by M: Moriarty, Oxford UK, Oxford University Press.
Jullien, V. (2015). Seventeenth century indivisibles revisited, Springer.
Kant, I. (2006). Anthropology from a pragmatic point of view. Transl. by R. B: Louden, Cambridge UK, Cambridge University Press.
Klempe, S. H. (2020). Tracing the emergence of psychology 1520–1750. New York, Springer: A sophisticated intruder to philosophy.
Krstic, K. (1964). Marko Marulic – the author of the term “psychology”, Acta Instituti Psychologici Universitatis Zagrabiensis, no. 36 (pp. 7–13), retrieved from Classics in the History of Psychology. http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Krstic/marulic.htm.
Leibniz, G. W. (1992). SchriftenzurLogik und zurphilosophischenGrundlegung von Mathematik und Naturwissenschaft. WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft: Darmstadt.
Leibniz, G. W. (1998). Philosophical texts. Transl. by R. Francks & R.S: Woolhouse, Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Mengal, P. (2005). La naissance de la psychologie, Paris, L’Harmattan.
Petersen, P. (1921/2015). Geschichte der aristotelischen Philosophie im protestantischen Deutschland, Leipzig, Felix Meiner (1921)/Dehli, Facsimile Publisher (2015).
Rabouin, D. (2015). Leibniz’ rigorous foundations of indivisibles. In V. Jullien (Ed.). Seventeenth century indivisibles revisited, Springer.
Rutherford, D. (2008). Leibniz on Infinitesimals and the Reality of Force. In U. Goldenbaum, D. Jesseph (Eds.), Infinitesimal Differences: Controversies between Leibniz and his Contemporaries (pp. 255-280). Berlin, De Gruyter.
Smith, R. (2013). Between mind and nature. A History of Psychology: London, Reaktion Books.
Thomas, A. (2001). Summa contra gentiles, Band 2, 2. Buch, Laetinisch und Deutsch, Darmstadt, Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.
Vidal, F. (2011). The sciences of the soul. The early modern origins of psychology, Transl. by S. Brown, Chicago & London, University of Chicago Press.
Wolff, C. (1732). Psychologia empirica methodo scientifica pertractata qua ea, quæ de anima humana indubia experientiæ fide constant, continentur et ad solidam universæ philosophiæ practica ac theologiæ naturalis tractationem via sternitur, Francfvrti, Prostat in Officina Libraria Rengeriana.
Wundt, W. (1862/1983a). Beiträge zur Theorie der Sinneswahrnehmung. Einleitung: Über die methoden in der Psychologie. In W. Wundt (Ed), Psychologische Schriften Band 1 (pp. 1-22). Leipzig, Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen Republik.
Wundt, W. (1894/1983b). Über psychische Kausalität und das Prinzip des psychophysischen Parallelismus. In W. Wundt (Ed.), Ausgewählte psychologische Schriften, Abhandlungen, Aufsätze, Reden, Band 2 1891–1913 (pp. 133–256). Leipzig, Zentralantiquariat der DDR.
Wundt, W. (1902). Outlines of psychology, 2nd (Engl). Judd, Leipzig, Wilhelm Engelmann: Transl. By C.H.
Wundt, W. (1917). Leibniz. Zu Seinem Zweihundertjährigen Todestag, 14. November 1916. Leipzig, Alfred Kröner Verlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Klempe, S.H. The Importance of Leibniz for Wundt. Hu Arenas 4, 20–31 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-020-00169-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42087-020-00169-9