Leibniz and the Two Sophies: The Philosophical Correspondence (review)

Reviewed by: Leibniz and the Two Sophies: The Philosophical Correspondence Edward W. Glowienka Lloyd Strickland, editor and translator. Leibniz and the Two Sophies: The Philosophical Correspondence. The Other Voice in Early Modern Europe: The Toronto Series, 10. Toronto: Iter, Inc.—Centre for Reformation and Renaissance Studies, 2011. Pp. xvi + 468. Paper, $37.00. Lloyd Strickland has produced the first volume in English dedicated to Leibniz’s epistolary exchanges with Electress Sophie of Hanover (1630–1714) and her daughter, Queen Sophie Charlotte of Prussia (1668–1705). He pits the volume against a scholarly tradition that has viewed the two Sophies as either, at best, significant footnotes in the story of Leibniz, or at worst, irrelevant philosophical lightweights. Strickland believes that attentiveness to the philosophical content of the Sophies’ correspondence with Leibniz reveals “clear evidence that both engaged in philosophical discussion proper, and had contributions to make to the philosophical debates of their day” (3). Translating only material deemed philosophically relevant, Strickland whittles down these correspondences—which combined include some 750 extant items—to a volume containing 81 letters or excerpts of letters, 9 additional fragments, and 3 supplementary texts meant to shed light on issues discussed in the correspondence: two of these being letters to Sophie from other authors, and the third a preface Leibniz wrote to an edition of Boethius’s Consolation. Strickland helpfully catalogues all extant manuscript versions and transcriptions of the letters, and documents any deletions in the manuscripts or variations among transcriptions. His introduction and footnotes provide useful historical background, especially regarding the diverse political and intellectual involvements of the Hanoverian court. The translation is consistent and readable throughout. Commendably, Strickland largely succeeds in his efforts to extract a coherent “philosophical narrative” from these exchanges (66). Less successful is Strickland’s attempt to recast the legacy of the two Sophies. Little in the volume attests to Sophie Charlotte’s philosophical acumen beyond Leibniz’s praises of her. Sophie is more complex, as she does challenge Leibniz on his root metaphysical [End Page 617] claim that immaterial unities, or monads, underlie the material world. However, despite Strickland’s gloss, Sophie shows herself to be more a philosophical gadfly (not meant pejoratively) than a “very independent thinker” with “positive writings on philosophy” (53). Strickland is right to point out that Sophie often presents respectable challenges to Leibniz’s positions, and he reconstructs, generously but plausibly, three arguments for what he considers her materialist theory of mind. Yet it must also be said that at times her rejoinders lack philosophical rigor. Her analogy that “[i]n matters of money, one unity is not worth as much as thousands, although in us you want this to be everything” seems to miss Leibniz’s point about the importance of substantial unities (203). Furthermore, her reluctance to accept Leibniz’s position appears as much theologically as philosophically motivated, for she seems committed, without argument, to accepting God as the only true unity (210). On the whole, the correspondence supports Strickland’s conclusion that Sophie “engaged in philosophical discussion proper,” but it fails to support compellingly the conclusion that she had “respectable and original contributions” to make to the contemporary philosophical scene (64). More convincing is Strickland’s analysis of Leibniz’s philosophical project as it is presented in the correspondence. He claims that throughout the correspondence, Leibniz’s agenda “is to show that with the right philosophy one can achieve contentment in this life” (34). Though such “philosophy of contentment” is much more central to Leibniz’s exchanges with Sophie Charlotte than Sophie, one of the most striking aspects of his correspondence with both is Leibniz’s seamless movement between his reflections on unity, infinity, embodiment, and immortality, on the one hand, and his reflections on theodicy and creaturely happiness on the other. Although Leibniz takes no position that cannot already be found in previously translated volumes, these letters offer a valuable perspective on how Leibniz understood the two doctrines that dominated his late writings—monadic metaphysics and optimism—as complementing each other. As the volume covers a period ranging from 1691 to 1713, I suspect it will be of some value to those interested in Leibniz’s ongoing attempts to articulate and...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.