{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022376543209876542, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.68859649122807, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Bodies of Thought: Science, Religion, and the Soul in the Early Enlightenment

perfectissimum, and to the related thesis that creatures can be characterized as participating (more or less) in the divine perfections. This part of the paper might be described as intelligent and informed musing on a dense and difficult aspect of Leibniz’s metaphysics, but it is none the worse for that. The volume as a whole has a rather stately and old-fashioned air, with a certain courtesy and decorum evident even in the manner of the objections raised by Headley, Hutton and Antognazza. This might in part be explained by the seniority of the contributors: a group of scholars half their age might enjoy more intellectual cut-and-thrust; but it also reflects the ‘big picture’ aspect of the volume as a whole. Scholars of this calibre and experience know their texts and their contexts, and are not likely to fall into simple errors of interpretation. The question of the relation of seventeenth-century rationalism to the Platonic tradition admits of so many subtle nuances that it would be sheer folly to expect simple answers to yes/no questions. In a volume like this, we hope for accumulated wisdom and breadth of vision rather than for close and detailed argument. In that hope we are not disappointed.