Talk:Best of all possible worlds/Archive 1

Archive 1

Russell

I've moved this (slightly tidied) comment here:

"Bertrand Russell, in his History of Western Philosophy suggested (based on Leibniz's private papers) that Leibniz was not himself satisfied with the argument, but published it to keep favour with his sponsors."

Russell's view of Leibniz (that he had two philosophies, one esoteric for himself and other philosophers, one exoteric for his patrons, etc.) has long been out of fashion. Most commentators now hold (so far as I'm aware) that Leibniz was committed to this view while realising that there were problems with it that needed attention. Indeed, the maerial on Leibniz is among the more misleading in what is a a rather misleading (but dangerously readable and attractively written) book. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 17:25, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

POV

The statement "the idea fell almost entirely out of favour with philosophers after the 1755 lisbon earthquake" is a rather general statement that without a citation is an obvious POV and clearly unencyclopedic. I am removing it.--Colinmorley1000 (talk) 20:39, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

Horrendous?

Why is it that Leibniz's philosophical ideas get no attention on Wikipedia. There is virtually no information paid to his monads or to the greatest possible world. What's with this? I think he's one of the most important thinkers to ever live. --96.253.50.232 (talk) 05:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

2 sections

use a tone and/or wording that is not adequate for an encyclopaedic entry. they take the tone of a personal dissertation instead. they should be rewritten and properly referenced, as third-person accounts of what the philosopher opined, not paraphrasing and personal interpretation-ridden text. FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 01:22, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Religious Capitalization?

The article capitalizes the first letter of He and His when referring to God. This violates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Capital_letters#Religion I am too lazy to change it. Whoever does though, remember that it is ok in quotations if that's how it was written by the author of the quote. 86.1.220.125 (talk) 07:30, 8 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Best of all possible worlds. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130730233032/http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p692Kp-BcRQ to https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p692Kp-BcRQ

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:47, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

Original research

I've removed recently-added unreferenced material that appears to be original research and so violates WP:NOR.

-- Jmc (talk) 08:16, 1 June 2018 (UTC)