Cosmological Argument- Leibniz

Question 1

Define sufficient reason

Answer 1

there is a complete/ultimate explanation for everything

Question 2

Define hypothetically necessary

Answer 2

must be so, given how the world is

Question 3

Define metaphysically necessary

Answer 3

must be so as there is no other logical explanation

Question 4

Leibniz’s cosmological argument

Answer 4

1. Every existing thing has an explanation for it existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause (this is the PSR)
2. If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
3. The universe is an existing thing.
4. Therefore the explanation of the universe is God.

Question 5

Criticisms of Leibniz’s argument

Answer 5

• just because the universe is full of contingent things, it doesn’t mean that the universe itself is contingent
• claims infinite regress is impossible but if they describe the world as eternal then infinite regress is implied => contradictory
• Quantum mechanics suggests that contingent events don’t have a reason due to it’s randomness => undermines sufficient reason
• not everything has to have a sufficient reason, the universe’s existence could be a “brute fact”
• there is no proximate or sufficient reason for God’s existence other than God himself => if PSR doesn’t apply to God, should it not apply to the universe?

Question 6

Leibniz’s principle of sufficient reason

Answer 6

• “If you suppose the world eternal, you will suppose nothing but a succession of states and will not find any of them a sufficient reason”
• we tend to use proximate reasons to explain something and L claims these never really answer the question

Question 7

Why does Leibniz criticise scientific explanations

Answer 7

• as they only provide proximate explanations for the way the world is
• the only sufficient reason is God