Newton versus Leibniz: intransparency versus inconsistency

摘要: In this paper I argue that inconsistencies in scientific theories may arise from the type of causality relation they—tacitly or explicitly—embody. All these seemingly different relations can be subsumed under a general strategy developed to defeat paradoxes which inevitably occur our experience real. With respect this, are just subclass larger class metaphysical theories, construed as attempt explain (part of) world consistently. share common structural backbone specificially designed paradoxes, their often wildly diverging ontological claims notwithstanding. This structure shapes procedures govern invention ideas context such by codifying some onto-logical priori assumptions regarding consistency reality into its bare conceptual framework. Causality plays key role here, because it implies conservation identity, itself far simple notion. It imposes strong demands on universalising power concerned. These met introduction metalevel encompasses notions ‘system’ and ‘lawful behaviour’. classical mechanics, division between universal particular leaves traces separate treatment cinematics dynamics. The fundamental backbone’s specific gestalt thus functions theory’s individual signature paves way comparative historical approach towards study. An important part my therefore explores connections they appear dealt with ancient philosophy re-appearance early modern natural science. analysis is applied mechanical Newton Leibniz, surprising results.