Explore BrainMass

The concept of causality in Hume, Leibniz and Kant

This content was STOLEN from BrainMass.com - View the original, and get the already-completed solution here!

Assume Leibniz, Kant and Hume were given the following claim: "Every event is determined by a cause according to constant laws". How would each of the three philosophers defend and explain this claim? Make sure to identify how each of their three philosophical systems differ, especially as regards to causation.

© BrainMass Inc. brainmass.com October 24, 2018, 6:29 pm ad1c9bdddf

Solution Preview

Starting with Leibniz, one could say that for him, any event could be explained by a prior cause and that prior cause must also be explained by an earlier cause. But referring to prior cause cannot really explain the reason for the existence of any event. There has to be a cause that is outside the series of causes. The final or sufficient reason for all things is to be found in the substance whose own existence is necessary and requires no prior cause and no explanation, that is, a "necessary Being whose essence involves existence". This being is God. He is the cause or sufficient reason or the ordinary events we experience in the world. Leibniz rejected the theory of atoms, that is, of matter as primary and substituted it with Monads which, unlike atoms, are not extended bodies. A monad is a metaphysically existent point and behaves according to its own pre-established purpose. When each monad behaves ...

Solution Summary

How would Hume, Leibniz and Kant react to the saying "Every event is determined by a cause according to constant laws"? This is the subject that this post addresses.

See Also This Related BrainMass Solution

Ethic theories & Physiicians

Please help me get started on the following questions:

This is a case study (see attachment). After reading the case, use two medical ethic theories being utilitarianism, Kant, Ross, feminist or Aristotle, and show what the physician should do in this case justifying your answer with two theories. Give a small introduction to the case. Either use two theories collectively to justify the answer or use two different opposing theories and show how the theory supporting your answer is superior to the other opposing theory. Choose the two theories that seem most relevant to the case.

See the attached file.

View Full Posting Details