Independence vs. Compossibility

Abstract

Wittgenstein and Leibniz had a radically different view on the ultimate
constituents of the world and resulting from this on the ontological status of
the actual world in contrast to possible worlds. Whereas Leibniz thought that
the world (the actual world) was chosen “as a whole” by God out of infinitely
many alternative possible worlds, Wittgenstein believed that the world was a
random conglomerate of mutually compatible “states of affairs”. For Leibniz no
part of the actual world could be identical to a part of a different world. For
Wittgenstein every part of the world had exact counterparts in other worlds.
They both agreed on the importance of logic though, and they both shared a
desire to explain the nature of contingency.