The True Meaning of Leibniz's Mill Argument

I’m an independent scholar. It is your generous contributions that make my work possible. Huge thanks to all my supporters! Support on Patreon:   / classicalphilosophy   Support me via PayPal: https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/janie... Gift Bitcoin: 3JimXYdoLVPWVEtk3tPtiYcLqQsFmS5KmH In this video I lay out what I take to be the true meaning of Leibniz's mill. Please see below for the full quote of Leibniz: 17. It has to be acknowledged that •perception can’t be explained by mechanical principles, that is by shapes and motions, and thus that nothing that •depends on perception can be explained in that way either. ·Suppose this were wrong·. Imagine there were a machine whose structure produced thought, feeling, and perception; we can conceive of its being enlarged while maintaining the same relative proportions ·among its parts·, so that we could walk into it as we can walk into a mill. Suppose we do walk into it; all we would find there are cogs and levers and so on pushing one another, and never anything to account for a perception. So perception must be sought in simple substances, not in composite things like machines. And that is all that can be found in a simple substance—•perceptions and •changes in perceptions; and those changes are all that the internal actions of simple substances can consist in.