[This post is a work in progress as part of the CAA Catechism.]
[Add the title only in the title field, not in the body of the post.]
Summary in 400 words or less:
“Why is there something rather than nothing?” Good question.
While Thomas Aquinas argued for God’s existence from ‘cause’ (God being the uncaused cause of the universe), Leibniz argued additionally from the position of sufficient reason for the universe’s existence. A primary idea of the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) is that nothing comes to pass without a sufficient reason, including the world.
“… the principle of sufficient reason, by virtue of which we consider that no fact can be real or existing and no proposition can be true unless there is sufficient reason, why it should be thus and not otherwise, even though in most cases these reasons cannot be known to us.” (Leibniz, Monadology, 1714)
Here is one example of Leibniz’s cosmological argument:
- Anything that exists has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause.
- If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.
- The universe exists.
- Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence. (from 1,3)
- Therefore, the explanation of the existence of the universe is God. (from 2,4)
(William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, Third Edition, Crossway Books, 2008, p. 106)
A primary aspect of the PSR is that there is a sufficient reason or cause for everything that exists. Necessary things that exist, such as God, have an internally self-sufficient reason for their existence. A contingent thing, like the physical universe, has a separate, external cause that is responsible for bringing it into existence. It can be understood from both a negative statement – ‘nothing happens without a reason’ – and a positive statement – ‘there is a reason for everything.’
Leibniz believed that meant the fact the universe exists is not a ‘sufficient reason’ for its existence, and that only God could be sufficient reason for the universe: God being ‘necessary’ and the universe being ‘contingent.’
Scripture for YouVersion:
“For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse.” Romans 1:20
Short audio/video:
The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument – https://youtu.be/s2ULF5WixMM
Three questions (one fill-in-the-blank, one multiple choice, one discussion question):
- Anything that exists has an _________ of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an _________ cause.
- A primary idea of the Principle of Sufficient Reason (PSR) is that:
A. God is the best ‘cause’ for the existence of the universe
B. Nothing comes to pass without a sufficient reason
C. A beginningless series of events in time cannot exist
D. All of the above - The best way to use the Principle of Sufficient Reason as an argument for the existence of God with an atheist.
References for further reading:
From Appeared to Blogly (Chad McIntosh): Leibnizian Cosmological Arguments. Brian Leftow, “A Leibnizian Cosmological Argument” Philosophical Studies 57 (1989), pp. 135-155. The explanandum in Leftow’s paper is abstract objects, so could be seen as a type of conceptualist argument as well. Stephen T. Davis, “The Cosmological Argument and the Epistemic Status of Belief in God” Philosophia Christi 2 (1999). I can’t recommend more highly Alexander Pruss’s “The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument,” in The Blackwell Companion to Natural Theology (Wiley-Blackwell, 2009), pp. 24-100. ok-length treatments are Bede Rundle’s critical, Why is there Something Rather than Nothing? (Oxford, 2004) and Pruss’s defense, The Principle of Sufficient Reason: A Reassessment (Cambridge, 2006). John Leslie, “A Proof of God’s Reality,” in Tyron Goldschmidt (ed.). The Puzzle of Existence: Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing? (Routledge, forthcoming).
The Principle of Sufficient Reason. Pruss, The Principle of Sufficient Reason: A Reassessment (Cambridge, 2006). Two good article treatments are Pruss, “Ex Nihilo Nihil Fit: Arguments New and Old for the Principle of Sufficient Reason” (2002); “A Restricted Principle of Sufficient Reason and the Cosmological Argument” Religious Studies 40 (2004), pp. 165–179. Tyron Goldschmidt (ed.). The Puzzle of Existence: Why Is There Something Rather Than Nothing? (Routledge, forthcoming).
The Principle of Necessary Reason. John O’Leary-Hawthorne and Andrew Cortens, “The Principle of Necessary Reason,” Faith and Philosophy 10/1 (1993), pp. 60-67.
The Principle of Necessary Reason. John O’Leary-Hawthorne and Andrew Cortens, “The Principle of Necessary Reason,” Faith and Philosophy 10/1 (1993), pp. 60-67.
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy – http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sufficient-reason/
Baker Encyclopedia of Christian Apologetics – page 298
Collaboration notes:
Collaborators: Mark McGee, John DePoe, Brian Chilton
[Add your name here only if you have created this topic or contributed valuable content or editing to this topic.]
[Add a copyright-free, relevant image to the body of the post (click the Add Media button), as well as going back in and selecting it as the featured image.]
Type “YES” and contact Maryann when at least three collaborators agree this is ready to be shared with YouVersion: