The Rationalists: Leibniz Freedom, Responsibility, Evil

1. The Rationalists: Leibniz Freedom, Responsibility, Evil Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

2. 1. Introduction Outline 2. Individual Freedom 3. Individual Responsibility 4. The problem of Evil 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

3. Introduction The Problem • Determinism and Freedom: • If everything is pre-determined, how can we be free • If everything is pre-determined, how can we be held responsible? • Isn’t God responsible for the existence of Evil on Earth? • Leibniz needs to provide an answer to the three questions above in order to make sense of the world as the best possible world in which we can be held morally responsible for our actions. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

4. 1. Introduction Outline 2. Individual Freedom 3. Individual Responsibility 4. The problem of Evil 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

5. Individual Freedom • Minimal Condition for Freedom: Contingency • Necessary truths / Contingent truths •  Our existence is contingent on God’s decree. Leibniz is not a necessitarian. • Certainty vs. Necessity • God foresees everything that will happen but does not make it happen • Example: your sister and horror movies • Coherent notion of individual freedom: substances unfold themselves under no external constraints Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

6. 1. Introduction Outline 2. Individual Freedom 3. Individual Responsibility 4. The problem of Evil 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

7. Individual Responsibility The Problem • - God is responsible for the fact that we actually exist • From the fact that we exist it follows that we will unfold ourselves, and hence, do what we do. • While we are free to do the things we do, it seems that we are not responsible for these things to happen: God ultimately is. Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

8. Individual Responsibility Leibniz’ answer • God decided only on the laws: • Creation of certain substances • Aim for the apparent good • But leaves us the choice – state of indifference • Ignorance Argument • We don’t know what we are supposed to do • We make our decisions without constraints • SO: we can be held responsible for our actions • It is not clear that Leibniz manages to salvage moral responsibility Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

9. 1. Introduction Outline 2. Individual Freedom 3. Individual Responsibility 4. The problem of Evil 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

10. The Problem is Evil The greater good Traditional answer to the problem of evil • God’s ways are not fully understandable • We cannot grasp all the details of the perfect of the Creation • It is enough to understand that the Creation is perfect • Traditional answers… to which the traditional objections apply ! Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

11. 1. Introduction Outline 2. Individual Freedom 3. Individual Responsibility 4. The problem of Evil 5. Conclusion Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana

12. Conclusion on Leibniz The core insight: Perfect God and Perfect World Epistemology: Mitigated Rationalism Metaphysics: Individual Substances • Necessity, Freedom and Responsibility: • Contingency exists – but not chance • Individual Freedom = absence of constraints • Individual Responsibility? Epistemic limitations Soazig Le Bihan - University of Montana