Question

According to Liebniz, all truths are analytic, but even so some are contingent and others necessary. State and explain Leibniz’s position here, giving his reasons for it. How does it contrast with Hume’s position. Do you think Leibniz’s posiiton here is sound ?

Answer 1

The distinction between necessary and contingent truths has so much important role in the explication of Leibniz’s philosophy of logic, metaphysics, and philosophy of science that the distinction spreads throughout most of his philosophical writings.A necessary truth is a proposition that could not possibly have been false. This can be expressed by saying that a necessary truth is a proposition that is true in every possible world.A contingent truth is a true proposition that could have been false; a contingent falsehood is a false proposition that could have been true. This is sometimes expressed by saying that a contingent proposition is one that is true in some possible worlds and not in others.Leibniz believed that there were different kinds of causes, efficient, final, and formal causes. However a substance only affects itself so he proposed that these substances where pre-established to interact in harmony.Hume suggested that  all causes are of the same kind and referred it as efficient cause.