Can someone explain Leibnizs PRINCIPLE OF SUFFICIENT REASON?
Leibniz believed that this is” the best of all possible worlds”. That is, all things happen because there is sufficient reason to make those things the best. So, the logic would go something like: The San Fransisco earthquake occurred because the opportunity for urban renewal and the jobs created by rebuilding (and probably some others) were sufficient reason to make the earthquake be the best possible thing that could happen that day. Critics (I fall in this category) say that to have to have sufficient reason or causation is no different than to say it happened. I think Leibniz knew that God would only create the best possible world and sufficient reason was a way to explain that. This may very well be true, but shouldn’t he just say that rather than calling it “sufficient reason”?
