Joel D Alvarez

Leibniz in his early philosophical career, mentions and adheres to the different forms of God’s knowledge such as, free, natural, and middle knowledge (God’s understanding). And surprisingly, Leibniz is consistent with these forms of God’s knowledge in his mature philosophical years. It is with surprise that many Leibnizian scholars do not implement these forms of God’s knowledge when Leibniz speaks of the Trinity, the problem of evil, the possibility and impossibility of the damnation of the innocent, phenomena, and Leibniz’s correspondence with Arnauld. It is essential to take into consideration Leibniz theological position since fundamentally Leibniz's philosophical assertion stems from and is grounded in his theology. For this reason, when discussing Leibniz's philosophical system, one must incorporate his theological perspective. Thus, when Leibniz speaks of God’s foreknowledge, one should decipher what form of knowledge is Leibniz speaking of and how precisely these types of God’s knowledge is incorporated into his system. For this reason, I argue that Leibniz uses, as a background, his understanding of these forms of knowledge, and by noticing this background, it will show how Leibniz departs from Spinoza’s necessitarianism regarding God’s intellect.

Both Western and Asian ethical thought have offered a variety of well-known approaches designed to guide moral thought and action, but there is a lack of research in the literature about how Native American and African thought can contribute to what it means to live an ethical life. In this chapter, I show how the communitarian approaches of Native American and African moral traditions emphasize being ethical for the sake of the community, which in turn benefits the individual. I further show how these approaches can be integrated into business and educational practices.

Current topics regarding the LGBTQ community and their movement suggest that one is born a certain way. That is, if one is attracted to the same sex or if the individual feels that they are the opposite sex, then they are born that way. Although this movement was on the rise in the past decade and is currently on the go, it is important to consider what philosophers say about this topic. In particular, I will investigate in what ways the work and philosophy of Leibniz connect to this movement and what he would say about it. Would Leibniz agree or disagree? How does a person’s identity connect with Leibniz’s position on the concept of the individual and its predicates? With such investigation, I will argue that Leibniz’s adherence to concepts, subject, predicates, and true propositions of individuals can leave room to suggest that individuals are born in the way their concept portrays them to be. In particular, I argue that individuals have their own respective identity within their very concept. That is, the individual’s concept expresses their predicates in the world and thus also showcases their identity in the world. In addition, I will also argue that although the concept of individuals has its identity, such as the predication ‘same-sex attraction’, a Leibnizian would insist that violence towards them should not be promoted but that one ought to pursue the betterment of society by promoting peace.

In Meditations on First Philosophy, René Descartes argues that one cannot trust one’s senses since they are not a reliable source of obtaining knowledge of the world. One of Descartes’s main contentions to support such an argument is from his explanation of dreams, where one can feel one is awake but instead one is dreaming. Native Americans, however, may argue that the experiences one has in dreams are real and are a source of knowledge of the real world. Although Descartes uses dreams to support his argument, some Native Americans have a different take on dreams. Dreams for Native Americans are a source of knowledge as well as a source for obtaining one’s identity. Gregory Cajete, in American Indian Thought, notes that “Dreams and Visions are a natural means for accessing knowledge and establishing relationship to the world. They are encouraged and facilitated.” In other words, it is through dreams that individuals are guided, destined, and informed. Therefore, dreams as understood by some Native Americans are an extension of reality that anticipate events that will happen or can happen. The focus of this paper is an exploration of the philosophical and religious epistemology pertaining to Native Americans as described in their accounts of dreams.

Baruch Spinoza famously said, “Whatsoever is, is in God, and without God, nothing can be, or be conceived”. This form of Pantheism is quite like eastern Pantheism, where in Hinduism they assert that “everything is Brahma”, or in Taoism, where Lao Tzu says, “Heaven and I were created together, and all things and I are one”. Although the western and eastern world shared their respective ideas of Pantheism, Native Americans also contributed to such discussion. However, comparative philosophy between western and Native American philosophy has been far neglected, and the same neglect has been shown regarding Native American contribution to Pantheism. Many Indigenous religions believe that there is a Great Spirit that is manifested as a life force or energy that communicates and speaks through nature. In other words, some Native American tribes believe that nature, or in extension the universe, is part of a Great Spirit that communicates to individuals in a naturalistic way. Such a Great Spirit created the world and is in everything that the Great Spirit created. Moreover, there are other Indigenous beliefs that not only hold a Pantheistic view but hold a Panentheistic perspective where God is a being that is present in creation but transcends from it. Therefore, although Indigenous beliefs about Pantheism or Panentheism have been much neglected, there is much to say about it. With such input from Native American religious culture, this paper seeks to show and compare Spinoza’s Pantheism and that of Native Americans. In addition, I wish to investigate in what ways Native American philosophy contributes to the discussion of cosmology, nature, and Pantheism. In particular, how do some Native American tribes understand God in a Pantheistic sense where nature and cosmology are one.