Leibniz’s God is a device to negate interiority about other persons

Evidence

It might seem that there can exist an extra-historical and extra-human objectivity. But who is the judge of such objectivity? Who is able to put himself in this kind of “standpoint of the cosmos in itself” and what could such a standpoint mean? It can indeed be maintained that here we are dealing with a hangover of the concept of God, precisely in its mystic form of a conception of an unknown God. — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1582 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: The idea of extra-human objectivity is a leftover of the concept of God — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1582; Believing in God is inseparable from anthropomorphizing God as a personlike mind — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 77; Leibniz’s shifting portrayals of Muhammad reveal an ideological transition in anti-Muslim discourse (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Leibniz’s Islam oscillated between theological foe, barbarian, and natural philosopher #exemplifies (0.85)
• The idea of extra-human objectivity is a leftover of the concept of God #expands (0.80) — Antonio Gramsci, Selections from the Prison Notebooks, 1582
• Leibniz’s shifting portrayals of Muhammad reveal an ideological transition in anti-Muslim discourse #exemplifies (0.80)
• Believing in God is inseparable from anthropomorphizing God as a personlike mind #complicates (0.75) — Norenzayan, Ara, Big gods - how religion transformed…, 77