 In these remarks Leibniz is using the term “esoteric” in a subtly different way than he is in the earlier quote from the New Essays. Whereas in the first text “esoteric” designated a mode of presenting one’s philosophy, in this text it concerns the content of one’s philosophy. Here he is drawing attention to the fact that his philosophy is less “popular” than Locke’s. Locke’s philosophy is popular in the sense that much of his philosophy accords with the deliverances of the senses and so-called “common sense”. Leibniz’s philosophy, in contrast, is often very abstract and far removed from ordinary opinions. Leibniz elaborates on this point in a 1702 letter to Sophie Charlotte where he distinguishes between things that can be known through the senses (the “sensible”) and things that are the “object of the understanding alone” (the “intelligible”). Leibniz claims that the existence of “intelligible things”, particularly the “mind or or soul”, is more certain than the existence of things that can be sensed. However, many people fail to recognize this because “they take sensible things for the only true things” (G 6:502–3; AG 188–9). This overreliance on the senses makes it difficult for people to understand Leibniz’s metaphysics, which involves a number of things that simply cannot be known through the senses. This puts Leibniz at a significant disadvantage when it comes to trying to communicate his philosophy to the general public. Readers are far more likely to find favor with Locke’s philosophy given that it coheres much better with their current beliefs (see Nelson 2005 for more on this general theme).